I sigh and look up from my tablet, staring at the blank wall across from me while I think about my lesson plan. It's always hard for me to make this decision every quarter when the deadline for teachers to submit their lesson plan orders comes around. What do I teach that will pay me and what am I willing to pay in order to teach something, that's what it always boils down to and it hurts my heart to know I am not willing to pay the price set on some lessons that would do some good.
I teach about sixty kids down in the Blue district. I teach them in a decent sized room located in an old church that still has one of the old hardcases running it. I don't know if he's Methodist, or Baptist, or what, but he's one of the ones who didn't elect for emigration and wasn't part of the forced relocation to one of the reservations. Most of the time the hard cases are Methodist or Baptists, but sometimes they're something else. They all say they stayed because this is where they're supposed to be.
The Blue district, cleverly named such after the phrase "Blue Collar", is where the people who are unskilled workers in the free labor market come to live. Oh, they don't have to live here, no. They are free to choose to live wherever they wish and as long as they have the money to pay for the expense of living where they wish they are free to stay there. People who cannot pay for their expenses are trespassing on private property or they are violating the property rights of others who live around them. Either way, they have to find somewhere else to live until they can afford to live where they want or they can happily choose to want to live where they can afford the expenses. Either way they are completely free and it is good.
I glance down at my tablet and consider my choices. I get paid 2000 CC, corporate credits, for each class designated as a P class. P stands for propaganda, which means the class teaches the most simple and direct lessons and that all the lessons support the same ideas. In this case all the P class lessons revolve around educating the students on Capitalism, the market, individual rights, non-aggression, and so forth. In short, they are just history lessons, economic lessons, and other lessons that just teach the students that everything around them is just he way it is supposed to be and that it is good. I can teach a maximum of 8 lessons in the day, the other time is for other things like meals, exercise, play, or whatever.
I sigh, and rub my face, before going back to staring at the wall and thinking. 16k CC is pretty decent. It's not great, no, but I know I could make a lot more teaching the Lams, Middies, or Almosts. But once you teach in a district up the ladder you don't go back down without raising some suspicions and attracting attention. I don't want attention, not with what I'm doing on the side. I wish Manuel would get here so I could at least talk while I think. Something to distract me from this headache.
The headaches are getting worse, which is the root of the problem with making lesson plan choices. I need to go to the doctor. Well, to a specialist, not just the doctor. I've already seen my general practitioner and they recommended seeing a specialist but noted they're out of my provider's network. If I want to see a specialist I have to pay my insurance to bump my network so I can go, or pay out of pocket. Hah, that's a joke, pay out of pocket. My insurance will pay 30CC for my checkup because they whacked out a deal with their magic capital hammers, but if I try to pay out of my pocket it'll cost me 150CC. No matter how I try to deal I don't have any magic hammers to help me. Maybe it's nothing, maybe the headaches will just go away.
I start picking the P classes I know I am going to teach. I check off Home Economics, History of the Free Districts, Market Geography, and Free Labor Market Strategies. I'm considering Investment Basics but I always feel terrible teaching Blues that class because it always gives them such hope they'll be able to get out of this district if they just save and put their money in some good investments. They wouldn't think that if I was allowed to teach them Calculus and Derivatives in the Market, Capital Speculation, Banking, and a number of other classes too expensive for me to even consider teaching to Blues unless I strike it rich on the lottery. Besides, even if I could afford it, if I started teaching those classes here I'd get hit with a CI flag so fast I my head would spin. I'd have to pay the fee to defer the CI case, which makes it go away unless I have more than three flags pending then it only defers it to the next quarter. You could, in theory, defer your CI's indefinitely if you had enough money but if you have more than three then sooner or later you have to have your case reviewed. CI stands for corporate investigation, it's a cooperative security process to investigate potential threats and sources of free market interference or regulation. Teaching Blues lessons they don't need is a flag. CI flags go away after one year, so it's not that big a deal unless you get three or more then you have to be able to pay for deferment bumps long enough for one of them to go away.
The door flies open with a crash and a voice hails, "Good morning, Duke! Are you ready for some foooootballll?!"
I sigh, "We don't watch football, Manuel." I rotate in my chair to face my visitor and my friend. Even though I don't really like him, he is my only friend because it's hard to make friends around here.
"Yeah, I know. I was just remembering old times. Those commercials used to crack me up." Manuel walks, kicking the door closed as he passes it. He plops down in the twin sized bed near my desk and smiles at me. "You get your lesson plan finished?"
"No, I'm still trying to decide which lessons I'm going to buy." I toss my tablet, my Market Interface Tablet or MIT for short, to him. He looks it over, scrolling through the page.
"Maybe Hawk'll have some suggestions. He cares about those kids more than us, which is saying something." I nod and am relieved at the suggestion. I hadn't thought about asking Hawk. Allow me to explain about the names; they're not our real names. No one has real names any more. You can buy your name on the market and change it whenever you feel like by using your MIT. Some names are more expensive than others because they're so in demand, but some names are relatively cheap. Mine's Duke because I always liked John Wayne movies back in the other world, in the past. Manuel's never explained why his name is Manuel. He says if he explains it he'll get hit by CI flags and have to change his name. Hawk is hawk because he wouldn't let us call him Tommy. The guys is crazy about these two modern tech Tomahawks he has that he was allowed to keep after the Corporate Gun Buyback Incentive was implemented. He always carries one on his hip in a holster. Manuel says its an act of defiance since he was forced to sell his guns. I know he wasn't really forced, but he couldn't afford to not sell them when our district experienced a pretty severe market shortage and he needed CC's to keep his church running.
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
My system of thought; Introduction.
First I would like to emphasize I am not trying to construct a new philosophical system at this time, nor do I anticipate I have the dedicated will and discipline to attempt to construct a new system in the future but time will tell. When I write analytic and rhetoric compositions in a rough draft, as I do in the blog, I do so from memory with no conformity to MLA, APA, or any other whatever A format that may be out there. I strive to write from the jargon of philosophy but borrow from all fields of the humanities whenever the context suits my needs, though I will identify the definitions and field of origin when I do so.
When I write I do not use references, to not read sources first and then try to compose some flowing piece revolving around a thesis in accordance to the academic rules of which I am educated and aware. I take what is in my head and try to express it in writing, which I do far better than I do in any other media. When I write I only hope I am following the rules of grammar properly as I had to teach them to myself with a manual I printed off the internet back in 2001. I had to do this because I didn't learn grammar, or much of anything, in middle and high school. Perhaps the last time I learned anything in school was in the 4th grade, which was the last year in which I trusted anything the school system had to teach me. I was verbally abused, bullied, and ridiculed by a teacher in the 5th grade who thought her methods were an appropriate way to motivate me to learn. They weren't but that's off topic.
In the interest of brevity I will try to list the major possible sources of ideas that have contributed to my writing and perspective. First, philosophically I try to hold to and write using the Trancendental Idealism as presented by Immanuel Kant. Note, however, my understanding of Kant is imperfect and my education in philosophy is autodiadactic. There will be errors but this adheres to my belief and position that no human is capable of communicating from one pure system of thought free from influence from ideas outside the system.
I was born to a married Caucasian couple in their twenties, my parents, who were living in poverty. Both were non-church going (practicing?) Christians, my father from the Southern U.S., my mother from the North. I was not raised continuously in any one community but moved from location to location, predominantly in the U.S. Southeast with the exception of 1 year in Texas and 1 year in Pennsylvania, every few years until I was 14 years old. By this age my parents were both working in a career in Clinical Social Work, and before they were getting their degrees in M.S. Social Work for my father and B.S. Social Work for my mother. From 14 to 19 I lived in Chattanooga (Hixson), TN. From 20 to 26 I was enlisted in the U.S. Navy as a Nuclear Field Technician but got out of that school after 6 months and finished serving honorably as a Fire Controlman (advanced electronics, radar repair and maintenance) and attaining the rank of e-5 before being honorably discharged in 2001. In the Navy I went on 2 deployments, one LEO in South America and one Mediterranean deployment. I also participated in RIMPAC. I returned to Chattanooga and have lived here since.
I was not raised in the church but was baptized some time around age 8, disavowed Christianity when I was a teenager at around 14 years old and identified myself as an atheist. Some times between and 19 and 26 I transitioned into a spiritual self-identity of agnostic and was a egocentric hedonist. I returned to studying Christianity and became a disciple of Christ in 2002. I have been participating in the Methodist denomination though I do not self-identify with denominational categories and believe myself to be a member of the Church Universal and think of myself only as a disciple of Christ.
I have gone to college off and on starting in 1993 and last attending in 2004 (or 5). I started with a major in Fine Arts: Drawing, switched to Computer Science, switched to English Lit, joined the Navy, and continued education majoring in B.S. Psychology with a minor in Business Entrepreneurship. I also have 36 hours towards a LDAC (Licensed Drug & Alcohol Counselor).
I have studied and trained in the martial arts starting at age 3 with my father and over the years in several different styles. Through training, interest, and practice of the martial arts I studied Zen Buddhism, Taoist philosophy, Confucianism, and Bushido. I studied and was deeply influenced by the works of Miyamoto Musashi and Sun Tzu.
I've read and studied the works of Plato, Aristotle, Marcus Aurelius, David Hume, Bertrand Russel, Soren Kierkegard, Friedrich Nietzsche, St. Augustine, Machiavelli, Rene Descartes, William James, Alfred Jules Ayer, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Karl Marx, Michel Foucault, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Adam Smith, Stephen Hawking and Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Also influential literary authors include Jack Kerouac, Hunter S. Thompson, John Steinbeck, Harper Lee, Maya Angelou, Ernest Hemmingway, George Orwell, Charles Dickenson, C.S. Lewis, J.D. Salinger, Aldus Huxley, and F. Scott Fitzgerald.
I've read far too many fiction books to count mostly from the Fantasy/Science Fiction genres when I was a teen. Among my favorite authors are Terry Pratchett, Stephen King, Terry Goodkind, R.A. Salvatore, Ed Greenwood, Piers Anthony, Douglas Adams, Spider Robinson, Anne Rice, Robert Jordan, Robert Lynn Aspirin, and Dean Koontz. I read the Harry Potter, Twilight, and Hunger Games series just to be a part of the cultural experience but wasn't overly thrilled with them.
I believe movies, music, and other forms of media to also be very influential in shaping our ideas. I was a cartoon lover, and still am at heart, raised on the cartoons and shows Transformers, He-Man, G.I. Joe, Rocky and Bullwinkle, Gilligan's Island, Gunsmoke, Kung Fu Theater, Knight Rider, MacGuyver, The A-team, Greatest American Hero, Murder She Wrote, The Cosby Show, Rosanne, the Simpsons, Saturday Night Live, Dragon Ball Z (not my choice, long story), The Kids in the Hall, The Sopranos, COPS, Americas Funniest Home Videos, MTV's Real World, MTV Headbangers Ball, Beavis and Butthead, Daria, Southpark, Full Metal Alchemist, FLCL, Aqua Teen Hunger Force, Metalocylpse, Star Trek, Firefly, Star Wars, Clerks, and more but these were the ones that stood out in a quick list. I almost started to include movies but realized that list would be too long. I came into age at the same time as the computer, game consoles, VCR and cell phones did.
As a generation X demographic I remember when there were no home computers and then getting my first home computer the Commodore Vic 20, which we upgraded to a Commodore 64 with a cassette tape drive. My first game system was an Atari 2600, but that's only because I refuse to count the Pong paddles as a real video game. I love playing video games, and any games, and I suppose I probably always will. I played both console and desktop games, RPG's (D&D, AD&D 1st, 2nd, 3rd), Magic the Gathering TCG from beta to revised including Arabian Nights, Antiquities, and Legends. I abandoned all but video gaming when I joined the Navy. I played the MMORPG's Everquest, Dark Ages of Camelot, Planetside, Eve Online, and World of Warcraft. I stopped playing MMORPG's because they became entirely too time consuming. For now I exclusively play Xbox 360, though I have a PS3 and WII, in my spare time.
My first cassette tapes were The Cars, ZZ Top, and Motley Crue through colombia house. I listened to Ray Stevens a lot as a kid. My dad introduced me to Black Sabbath, probably because Ray Stevens was driving him crazy, and I started listening to Classic Rock. Led Zepplin, CCR, Jethro Tull, expanded to include Ozzy Osbourne (before he had a T.V. show), Alice Cooper, KISS, Motley Crue. From there to Metallica, Metal Church, Slaughterhouse, Pennywise, Slayer, Danzig, Misfits, Ministry, Iron Maiden, Cannibal Corpse, Deicide, King Diamond. With a wild jump from there to Tom Petty, Patsy Kline, Stevie Ray Vaughn, B.B. King, Stone Temple Pilots, Garth Brookes, Shania Twain, Temple of the Dog, Blind Melon, Paula Abdul, M.C. Hammer, Vanilla Ice, 3rd Base, Public Enemy. Hopping along merrily to The Gorillas, Ace of Bass, Twista, Insane Clown Posse, Tupac Shakur, Korn, Lords of Acid, Cake, Marilyn Manson, They Might Be Giants, The Beatles, John Lennon, Alice in Chains, Pearl Jam, Nirvana. And so forth through Bob Dylan, Willie Nelson, Christina Aguilara, Eminem, Big E. Smalls, Will Smith, Smash Mouth, The Blood Hound Gang, the Pogues, Gwar, Brittany Spears, Shedaisy, Sean Kingston, Bob Marley, Frank Zappa, Peter Paul and Mary, Pit Bull, Wutang Clan, Fergie, DMX, Skrillex, DJ Baby Anne, DJ Shadow, Crystal Method, the Chemical Brothers, Sarah McLauchlen, Snoop Dog, Dave Matthews, Mika, Rufus Wainwright, Sufjan Stephens, Tenacious D and many more unpredictably diverse with the exception of Kenny G, Smooth Jazz, and anything with an alto sax.
I love watching documentaries and online lectures from TED, Yale, and Harvard. I like the internet humor sites Cracked and the Onion.
Comedians Daniel Tosh, Dane Cook, Dimitri Martin, Chris Rock, C.K. Lewis, Eddy Murphy, Bill Cosby, Zach Galifianakis, Mitch Hedberg, Adam Sandler, Tyler Perry, Bobcat Goldthwait, Richard Pryor, David Chapel, Sara Silverman, and more.
Random facts: When I was 15 I had a poster of Cindy Crawford on my bedroom wall and when I was 22 I met Cindy Crawford at a book signing. I didn't mention the poster when we talked briefly. I sat next to Mario Van Peebles in a bar during the Tyson/Hollifield fight.
I've been divorced once, married when I was 20 and divorced at 22. I have a daughter named Katherine Yvonne who lives with her mother and I miss every day and wish was part of my life. I have a loving, beautiful wife, Toni, 2 step-sons Austin and Jeremy, another daughter Madison, and a son Jacob.
These things are just a partial snapshot of the major ideas and influences to my thinking and personality. There are far more influences and variable than these but I'm hoping a more exhaustive list is not necessary.
When I write I do not use references, to not read sources first and then try to compose some flowing piece revolving around a thesis in accordance to the academic rules of which I am educated and aware. I take what is in my head and try to express it in writing, which I do far better than I do in any other media. When I write I only hope I am following the rules of grammar properly as I had to teach them to myself with a manual I printed off the internet back in 2001. I had to do this because I didn't learn grammar, or much of anything, in middle and high school. Perhaps the last time I learned anything in school was in the 4th grade, which was the last year in which I trusted anything the school system had to teach me. I was verbally abused, bullied, and ridiculed by a teacher in the 5th grade who thought her methods were an appropriate way to motivate me to learn. They weren't but that's off topic.
In the interest of brevity I will try to list the major possible sources of ideas that have contributed to my writing and perspective. First, philosophically I try to hold to and write using the Trancendental Idealism as presented by Immanuel Kant. Note, however, my understanding of Kant is imperfect and my education in philosophy is autodiadactic. There will be errors but this adheres to my belief and position that no human is capable of communicating from one pure system of thought free from influence from ideas outside the system.
I was born to a married Caucasian couple in their twenties, my parents, who were living in poverty. Both were non-church going (practicing?) Christians, my father from the Southern U.S., my mother from the North. I was not raised continuously in any one community but moved from location to location, predominantly in the U.S. Southeast with the exception of 1 year in Texas and 1 year in Pennsylvania, every few years until I was 14 years old. By this age my parents were both working in a career in Clinical Social Work, and before they were getting their degrees in M.S. Social Work for my father and B.S. Social Work for my mother. From 14 to 19 I lived in Chattanooga (Hixson), TN. From 20 to 26 I was enlisted in the U.S. Navy as a Nuclear Field Technician but got out of that school after 6 months and finished serving honorably as a Fire Controlman (advanced electronics, radar repair and maintenance) and attaining the rank of e-5 before being honorably discharged in 2001. In the Navy I went on 2 deployments, one LEO in South America and one Mediterranean deployment. I also participated in RIMPAC. I returned to Chattanooga and have lived here since.
I was not raised in the church but was baptized some time around age 8, disavowed Christianity when I was a teenager at around 14 years old and identified myself as an atheist. Some times between and 19 and 26 I transitioned into a spiritual self-identity of agnostic and was a egocentric hedonist. I returned to studying Christianity and became a disciple of Christ in 2002. I have been participating in the Methodist denomination though I do not self-identify with denominational categories and believe myself to be a member of the Church Universal and think of myself only as a disciple of Christ.
I have gone to college off and on starting in 1993 and last attending in 2004 (or 5). I started with a major in Fine Arts: Drawing, switched to Computer Science, switched to English Lit, joined the Navy, and continued education majoring in B.S. Psychology with a minor in Business Entrepreneurship. I also have 36 hours towards a LDAC (Licensed Drug & Alcohol Counselor).
I have studied and trained in the martial arts starting at age 3 with my father and over the years in several different styles. Through training, interest, and practice of the martial arts I studied Zen Buddhism, Taoist philosophy, Confucianism, and Bushido. I studied and was deeply influenced by the works of Miyamoto Musashi and Sun Tzu.
I've read and studied the works of Plato, Aristotle, Marcus Aurelius, David Hume, Bertrand Russel, Soren Kierkegard, Friedrich Nietzsche, St. Augustine, Machiavelli, Rene Descartes, William James, Alfred Jules Ayer, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Karl Marx, Michel Foucault, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Adam Smith, Stephen Hawking and Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Also influential literary authors include Jack Kerouac, Hunter S. Thompson, John Steinbeck, Harper Lee, Maya Angelou, Ernest Hemmingway, George Orwell, Charles Dickenson, C.S. Lewis, J.D. Salinger, Aldus Huxley, and F. Scott Fitzgerald.
I've read far too many fiction books to count mostly from the Fantasy/Science Fiction genres when I was a teen. Among my favorite authors are Terry Pratchett, Stephen King, Terry Goodkind, R.A. Salvatore, Ed Greenwood, Piers Anthony, Douglas Adams, Spider Robinson, Anne Rice, Robert Jordan, Robert Lynn Aspirin, and Dean Koontz. I read the Harry Potter, Twilight, and Hunger Games series just to be a part of the cultural experience but wasn't overly thrilled with them.
I believe movies, music, and other forms of media to also be very influential in shaping our ideas. I was a cartoon lover, and still am at heart, raised on the cartoons and shows Transformers, He-Man, G.I. Joe, Rocky and Bullwinkle, Gilligan's Island, Gunsmoke, Kung Fu Theater, Knight Rider, MacGuyver, The A-team, Greatest American Hero, Murder She Wrote, The Cosby Show, Rosanne, the Simpsons, Saturday Night Live, Dragon Ball Z (not my choice, long story), The Kids in the Hall, The Sopranos, COPS, Americas Funniest Home Videos, MTV's Real World, MTV Headbangers Ball, Beavis and Butthead, Daria, Southpark, Full Metal Alchemist, FLCL, Aqua Teen Hunger Force, Metalocylpse, Star Trek, Firefly, Star Wars, Clerks, and more but these were the ones that stood out in a quick list. I almost started to include movies but realized that list would be too long. I came into age at the same time as the computer, game consoles, VCR and cell phones did.
As a generation X demographic I remember when there were no home computers and then getting my first home computer the Commodore Vic 20, which we upgraded to a Commodore 64 with a cassette tape drive. My first game system was an Atari 2600, but that's only because I refuse to count the Pong paddles as a real video game. I love playing video games, and any games, and I suppose I probably always will. I played both console and desktop games, RPG's (D&D, AD&D 1st, 2nd, 3rd), Magic the Gathering TCG from beta to revised including Arabian Nights, Antiquities, and Legends. I abandoned all but video gaming when I joined the Navy. I played the MMORPG's Everquest, Dark Ages of Camelot, Planetside, Eve Online, and World of Warcraft. I stopped playing MMORPG's because they became entirely too time consuming. For now I exclusively play Xbox 360, though I have a PS3 and WII, in my spare time.
My first cassette tapes were The Cars, ZZ Top, and Motley Crue through colombia house. I listened to Ray Stevens a lot as a kid. My dad introduced me to Black Sabbath, probably because Ray Stevens was driving him crazy, and I started listening to Classic Rock. Led Zepplin, CCR, Jethro Tull, expanded to include Ozzy Osbourne (before he had a T.V. show), Alice Cooper, KISS, Motley Crue. From there to Metallica, Metal Church, Slaughterhouse, Pennywise, Slayer, Danzig, Misfits, Ministry, Iron Maiden, Cannibal Corpse, Deicide, King Diamond. With a wild jump from there to Tom Petty, Patsy Kline, Stevie Ray Vaughn, B.B. King, Stone Temple Pilots, Garth Brookes, Shania Twain, Temple of the Dog, Blind Melon, Paula Abdul, M.C. Hammer, Vanilla Ice, 3rd Base, Public Enemy. Hopping along merrily to The Gorillas, Ace of Bass, Twista, Insane Clown Posse, Tupac Shakur, Korn, Lords of Acid, Cake, Marilyn Manson, They Might Be Giants, The Beatles, John Lennon, Alice in Chains, Pearl Jam, Nirvana. And so forth through Bob Dylan, Willie Nelson, Christina Aguilara, Eminem, Big E. Smalls, Will Smith, Smash Mouth, The Blood Hound Gang, the Pogues, Gwar, Brittany Spears, Shedaisy, Sean Kingston, Bob Marley, Frank Zappa, Peter Paul and Mary, Pit Bull, Wutang Clan, Fergie, DMX, Skrillex, DJ Baby Anne, DJ Shadow, Crystal Method, the Chemical Brothers, Sarah McLauchlen, Snoop Dog, Dave Matthews, Mika, Rufus Wainwright, Sufjan Stephens, Tenacious D and many more unpredictably diverse with the exception of Kenny G, Smooth Jazz, and anything with an alto sax.
I love watching documentaries and online lectures from TED, Yale, and Harvard. I like the internet humor sites Cracked and the Onion.
Comedians Daniel Tosh, Dane Cook, Dimitri Martin, Chris Rock, C.K. Lewis, Eddy Murphy, Bill Cosby, Zach Galifianakis, Mitch Hedberg, Adam Sandler, Tyler Perry, Bobcat Goldthwait, Richard Pryor, David Chapel, Sara Silverman, and more.
Random facts: When I was 15 I had a poster of Cindy Crawford on my bedroom wall and when I was 22 I met Cindy Crawford at a book signing. I didn't mention the poster when we talked briefly. I sat next to Mario Van Peebles in a bar during the Tyson/Hollifield fight.
I've been divorced once, married when I was 20 and divorced at 22. I have a daughter named Katherine Yvonne who lives with her mother and I miss every day and wish was part of my life. I have a loving, beautiful wife, Toni, 2 step-sons Austin and Jeremy, another daughter Madison, and a son Jacob.
These things are just a partial snapshot of the major ideas and influences to my thinking and personality. There are far more influences and variable than these but I'm hoping a more exhaustive list is not necessary.
Notes: Shame
Shame is one of the non-rational methods of influencing others and is also one of the methods that is non-physical but both verbal and non-verbal in nature. Shame is something that can be an action directed at an object, "to shame someone.", it can be a general attitude of body language and vocal tone that conveys the act of shaming or indicates acceptance of shame.
shame (sh
m)
As with any dictionary definition the concept is devoid of experiential reference and full comprehension requires deeper examination and experience of the concept. Without experience only an imperfect comprehension will be attained.
There are many various media of communication and through those media are various methods in which to communicate and to convey ideas. The more one expands their understanding trying to include an understanding of all modes of communication the better they will be equipped to discern the gestalt picture of an individual, small group, large group, culture, or nation that has a distinct identity. This assumes what is truth applies to the individual as a whole and will also apply to larger groups. Under acceptance of this assumption what appears not to apply for both individual and group must involve unknown confounding variables and needs to be further explored until the problem with comprehension is resolved.
Shame is related to the methods of transmitting information through tradition, indoctrination, cultural norms, social hierarchies, and perhaps other to be identified later, using specifically irrational and non-systematic methods. The categories possible are rational, irrational, systematic, non-systematic, codified, oral, and more to be identified later.
When the participant in a group has received the ideological norms (irrational and non-systematic) they are expected to conform to the norms of the group and to reflect its values in their behavior and speech. When the individual follows the norm, they receive praise. When the individual, exemplifies the highest example of some idea(s) of the group they are receive honor. When the individual perfectly represents all ideas of the group with no contradicting behavior or communication they are receive glory. All these are abstract social rewards to encourage behavior and thought.
On the other side, when an individual violates the norm of the group they receive varying degrees of disincentives or punishment. Minor violations invite reproach and shame. Moderate violations receive varying reactions among which includes shame, discipline, argument, bullying, and others yet to be identified and categorized. The moderate reactions vary in intensity and the methods can be either positive or negative (give or take away). The major violation of norms receive shame, ostracizing, hostility, threats, vigorous attempts at argument and/or persuasion, and others to be identified and categorized later. The extreme violation of norms/taboos results in one of the following expulsion from the group, isolation, violence, and perhaps others to be identified and categorized later.
Shame is one of the methods of communicating disapproval of behavior and signals violation of norms in all but the extreme category of transgression. Shame merely varies in intensity from mild to extreme across the range of the severity of violations.
Shame, in and of itself, is neither a good nor bad construct but a tool that is used to communicate disapproval of behavior in an irrational modality using both non-verbal and linguistic techniques. As with all tools shame is capable of being used intentionally to manipulate in order to achieve desired outcomes. When shame is used as a tool to control or dominate the behavior of others without any correlation to whether or not those others are complying with norms then shame is being used as a tool of abuse, which shall be called "toxic shame" to reflect the concept phrase already found in the psychological field.
Toxic Shame:
Toxic Shame is shame that is not related to a specific/defined norm and is not correlated to behavior that violates a norm. Without a norm to associate with being shamed and with removal of shame the subject attaches the violation to the only common variable present at all times, namely themselves. Since the shame isn't clearly defined as relating to a particular trait, behavior, or other identifier of the subject then the shame is self-attributed to their identity/ego and internalized as toxic shame.
The resulting effect of toxic shame is a continuous internal pressure to change some unknown thing about self in order to alleviate the emotional stress/pain felt from shame. Since the "thing" is unknown changes will be experimented with and discarded to no effect in changing the state of toxic shame. The continuous unrelenting presence of shame causes increasing degrees of suffering until some event causes a shift in correlating the shame with something other than ego or the subject has been removed from the source(s) of toxic shame and their identity of self has been redefined to the point where there is nothing that was once internally correlated to the toxic shame.
shame (sh
m)
n.
1.
a. A painful emotion caused by a strong sense of guilt, embarrassment, unworthiness, or disgrace.
b. Capacity for such a feeling: Have you no shame?
2. One that brings dishonor, disgrace, or condemnation.
3. A condition of disgrace or dishonor; ignominy.
4. A great disappointment.
tr.v. shamed, sham·ing, shames
Idiom:
1. To cause to feel shame; put to shame.
2. To bring dishonor or disgrace on.
3. To disgrace by surpassing.
4. To force by making ashamed: He was shamed into making an apology.
put to shame
1. To fill with shame; disgrace.
2. To outdo thoroughly; surpass: Your productivity has put the rest of us to shame.
As with any dictionary definition the concept is devoid of experiential reference and full comprehension requires deeper examination and experience of the concept. Without experience only an imperfect comprehension will be attained.
There are many various media of communication and through those media are various methods in which to communicate and to convey ideas. The more one expands their understanding trying to include an understanding of all modes of communication the better they will be equipped to discern the gestalt picture of an individual, small group, large group, culture, or nation that has a distinct identity. This assumes what is truth applies to the individual as a whole and will also apply to larger groups. Under acceptance of this assumption what appears not to apply for both individual and group must involve unknown confounding variables and needs to be further explored until the problem with comprehension is resolved.
Shame is related to the methods of transmitting information through tradition, indoctrination, cultural norms, social hierarchies, and perhaps other to be identified later, using specifically irrational and non-systematic methods. The categories possible are rational, irrational, systematic, non-systematic, codified, oral, and more to be identified later.
When the participant in a group has received the ideological norms (irrational and non-systematic) they are expected to conform to the norms of the group and to reflect its values in their behavior and speech. When the individual follows the norm, they receive praise. When the individual, exemplifies the highest example of some idea(s) of the group they are receive honor. When the individual perfectly represents all ideas of the group with no contradicting behavior or communication they are receive glory. All these are abstract social rewards to encourage behavior and thought.
On the other side, when an individual violates the norm of the group they receive varying degrees of disincentives or punishment. Minor violations invite reproach and shame. Moderate violations receive varying reactions among which includes shame, discipline, argument, bullying, and others yet to be identified and categorized. The moderate reactions vary in intensity and the methods can be either positive or negative (give or take away). The major violation of norms receive shame, ostracizing, hostility, threats, vigorous attempts at argument and/or persuasion, and others to be identified and categorized later. The extreme violation of norms/taboos results in one of the following expulsion from the group, isolation, violence, and perhaps others to be identified and categorized later.
Shame is one of the methods of communicating disapproval of behavior and signals violation of norms in all but the extreme category of transgression. Shame merely varies in intensity from mild to extreme across the range of the severity of violations.
Shame, in and of itself, is neither a good nor bad construct but a tool that is used to communicate disapproval of behavior in an irrational modality using both non-verbal and linguistic techniques. As with all tools shame is capable of being used intentionally to manipulate in order to achieve desired outcomes. When shame is used as a tool to control or dominate the behavior of others without any correlation to whether or not those others are complying with norms then shame is being used as a tool of abuse, which shall be called "toxic shame" to reflect the concept phrase already found in the psychological field.
Toxic Shame:
Toxic Shame is shame that is not related to a specific/defined norm and is not correlated to behavior that violates a norm. Without a norm to associate with being shamed and with removal of shame the subject attaches the violation to the only common variable present at all times, namely themselves. Since the shame isn't clearly defined as relating to a particular trait, behavior, or other identifier of the subject then the shame is self-attributed to their identity/ego and internalized as toxic shame.
The resulting effect of toxic shame is a continuous internal pressure to change some unknown thing about self in order to alleviate the emotional stress/pain felt from shame. Since the "thing" is unknown changes will be experimented with and discarded to no effect in changing the state of toxic shame. The continuous unrelenting presence of shame causes increasing degrees of suffering until some event causes a shift in correlating the shame with something other than ego or the subject has been removed from the source(s) of toxic shame and their identity of self has been redefined to the point where there is nothing that was once internally correlated to the toxic shame.
Monday, November 19, 2012
Freedom of Education
Currently, in our society, education is not a right that is officially recognized by the U.S. Constitution though the power to collect taxes and give sates money for it is a power the Federal Government possesses. While many view this exercise of power as motivated by good intentions it isn't necessarily so. The exercise of the power can be used for the betterment of the education system and the people but so far this doesn't seem to be the case. That is not to say there has been no benefit, but there is no underlying intent inherent in the system motivates the Federal government to provide funds for education solely for the benefit of the citizenry. The power of the Federal government to fund state programs has been used, more often, to establish the hierarchical relationship of the federal government as superior to the State government and to provide incentives to States which cooperate in working towards goals and programs set by the Federal government.
A highly educated population is more difficult to govern and the political process is complicated by a more active participation by a diverse population with competing interests that are validated by rational argument. And educated population is more difficult to influence because it is more critical of the information being presented and more able to defend their own interests using argument.
For education to be for the good of the citizens and for the process to be more directed towards providing high quality education to all people the right of education must be recognized and codified by an amendment to the U.S. constitution. There are all kinds of theoretical benefits and incentives for raising the education levels for the people, however in practical application there are many motives to resist educating the population.
A highly educated population is more difficult to govern and the political process is complicated by a more active participation by a diverse population with competing interests that are validated by rational argument. And educated population is more difficult to influence because it is more critical of the information being presented and more able to defend their own interests using argument.
Historically, it is more beneficial for those in power who design and run a society to be the ones best educated and for the majority of the population being governed to be less educated. This isn't a matter of prejudice but a matter of expedience. The more educated dissenting voices to the process the slower the process will work in designing and executing policy.
I would wonder in the case of a government where there are a large number of leaders that seem to be poorly educated where the power dictating policy and actions is seated. Leadership and governing large systems requires both education and intelligence. If the public face of government is neither then the power lies elsewhere.
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Why Capitalism isn't working.
The underlying problems in the system that make Capitalism harmful rather than beneficial.
Problem: The theories of Capitalism presume the consumer and the free labor populations are rational individuals making rational choices. This is not the case in the present system. Rational thought is a disciplined process that requires specific education and training. Critical thinking skills are essential but not sufficient in establishing a rational individual. The current education system does not focus on the goal of training rational individuals to participate in the Capitalist economy.
Question: What is the goal of the current education system?
Problem: The mixed market in place leans towards a free market economy where goods and services are created by consumer demand. At present the majority of consumers are not rational individuals making "good" choices that benefit all.
Problem: The investor/capitalist sector of our system are educated sufficiently in critical thinking and can be supposed to be rational individuals making choices that benefit their interests using the profit motive. This motive focuses on the making a profit on investment as good and the loss of return on investment as bad. There are no other moral or ethical considerations in place guide action. The rational choices of the majority are dictated by the profit motive alone.
Problem: There is no demand in the general consumer market for improved education, which discourages private sector investment and innovation in education.
Problem: Creating a rational consumer and free labor population is against the interests of the private sector and the capitalists (owners of ways and means of production) because it will radically restructure and redefine demand in the market in such a way that catastrophic loss of profit will be the short term result. Under the profit motive, loss is bad. The profit motive is the single most influential guiding principle in Capitalism.
Problem: Moral and Ethical systems that guide individual behavior which interfere with consumer spending and free labor demands in such a way that hurts profit are suppressed and vigorously argued against as untrue.
Problem: Owners of ways and means of production and investment capital are using their resources to influence government policy. This is rational self interest behavior guided by the profit motive.
Problem: The theories of Capitalism presume the consumer and the free labor populations are rational individuals making rational choices. This is not the case in the present system. Rational thought is a disciplined process that requires specific education and training. Critical thinking skills are essential but not sufficient in establishing a rational individual. The current education system does not focus on the goal of training rational individuals to participate in the Capitalist economy.
Question: What is the goal of the current education system?
Problem: The mixed market in place leans towards a free market economy where goods and services are created by consumer demand. At present the majority of consumers are not rational individuals making "good" choices that benefit all.
Problem: The investor/capitalist sector of our system are educated sufficiently in critical thinking and can be supposed to be rational individuals making choices that benefit their interests using the profit motive. This motive focuses on the making a profit on investment as good and the loss of return on investment as bad. There are no other moral or ethical considerations in place guide action. The rational choices of the majority are dictated by the profit motive alone.
Problem: There is no demand in the general consumer market for improved education, which discourages private sector investment and innovation in education.
Problem: Creating a rational consumer and free labor population is against the interests of the private sector and the capitalists (owners of ways and means of production) because it will radically restructure and redefine demand in the market in such a way that catastrophic loss of profit will be the short term result. Under the profit motive, loss is bad. The profit motive is the single most influential guiding principle in Capitalism.
Problem: Moral and Ethical systems that guide individual behavior which interfere with consumer spending and free labor demands in such a way that hurts profit are suppressed and vigorously argued against as untrue.
Problem: Owners of ways and means of production and investment capital are using their resources to influence government policy. This is rational self interest behavior guided by the profit motive.
Thursday, May 12, 2011
Plato's Dialogues: Crito; summary and commentary
(Notes: 1st draft, unrevised. I consider this open sourced information free from copyright. Don't copy any part of this text verbatim for academic work since that would constitute plagiarism under academic University rules. The content of this blog is easily found through internet searches and exact word duplicates will show up under metasearches. Use my work if you wish but don't get busted for plagiarism in the process.)
This is a summary and commentary on the dialogue "Crito" written by Plato. Source = "http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/crito.html"
The dialogue "Crito" by Plato is written as an account of Socrates's conversation with a friend named Crito. The topic of the dialogue is Socrates's upcoming execution sentence passed by the Athenian State on charges of corrupting the youth and something else, promoting Atheism I think. I will iron out the exact details later and revise this draft accordingly.
While the dialogue contains some interesting and significant concepts I believe it is imperative the reader understands that Socrates himself never wrote down any of his teachings during his life. Plato was a disciple of Socrates and thusly was highly influenced by the life and thoughts of the man. However, since Plato is the author of the dialogue it calls into question the veracity of the material when imagined against the potential teachings of Socrates. In the modern context several scientific studies in the field of psychology show that human memory is fallible, subject to internal censors of the individual and changes according to the personality and subjective perceptions of the individual remembering events. Since Plato is the author then it is reasonable to assume Plato has injected his own subjective perceptions, values, and personality into the construction of Socrates's teachings.
By no means do I intend to discount the entirety of the lessons available through Plato's dialogues but only to raise awareness that these dialogues are second hand transmissions of Socrates's teaching's filtered through the fallible medium of Plato's perception.
On top of Plato's bias coloring the whole dialogue I feel it's important to realize the text is a work of fiction where the author, Plato, writes out the entirety of the dialogue. This means Plato imagines and writes the part of Crito as well as Socrates. The construct of the dialogue gives the illusion of a recorded text written down by some stenographer taking dictation. This is not the case and is merely an literary illusion. All content is the work and produce of Plato's imagination and may or may not accurately reflect the values and opinions of Socrates.
To summarize the dialogue, Crito is an intimate friend of Socrates who is imprisoned by the Athenian State and is awaiting execution. The purpose of Crito's visit is to try and convince Socrates to flee from Athens and avoid execution. Crito represents himself and several interested parties who are more than willing to contribute their efforts and resources to rescue Socrates from death. The dialogue begins when Socrates awakes from sleeping to find Crito sitting with him in his cell.
There is some minor attention paid in the beginning text to establish the relationship between Crito and Socrates. They are friends and Crito is distressed by Socrates's predicament; so much so he is seeking to rescue Socrates from his situation and convince Socrates it is just to escape his sentence. This theme, whether or not it is just and good to avoid Socrates's death sentence is the central issue of the dialogue.
Crito presents arguments that the sentence is unjust because it deprives Socrates's friends and family of his wisdom and influence in their lives. The argument centers around the potential unjust nature of the sentence and it's effects in the lives of those who are intimate with Socrates; his children and his friends. A great deal of attention is paid on the potential perception of the public and their opinions formed by Socrates's actions allowing himself to be executed for what seems to be unjust reasons. Crito fears the public opinion may be that the friends of Socrates stood by and allowed him to be unjustly put to death instead of taking steps to rescue him when he (Crito) and his friends had the means to rescue Socrates.
I wonder if Plato is trying to deal with his own feelings of guilt in allowing Socrates to die when he had the means and the power to rescue him from his fate. This dialogue can be the process by which Plato alleviates himself from the guilt of not intervening in Socrates's sentence. Ultimately we must realize the sole author of this dialogue is Plato himself and all the text is the work of Plato's mind and not some recorded conversation between Crito and Socrates. It is, however, important to remind ourselves that Plato was a disciple of Socrates and was highly influenced by his teachings so the content of the dialogue is the best and closest we will ever come to understanding the nature of Socrates in this event.
Socrates counters Crito's argument with his own that ultimately states he must subjigate himself to the will of Athens and die as sentenced or he would otherwise contradict all of his prior statements, arguments, and ethics presented during the trial. Socrates argues he is bound by an implied contract with the State of Athens where as a willing citizen he agreed to uphold the Laws and decisions of the State regardless of whether or not the sentence itself is considered just and right. Socrates shifts all the impetus of Crito's objections as burdens of the jurors who tried and sentenced Socrates and not as burdens of consideration for Socrates himself.
Socrates's sole consideration is whether or not it is Just and good to obey or disobey a lawful sentence from the State of Athens. He concludes that he must obey the sentence regardless of whether or not it is justice because the Laws of the State are sacrosanct whether the sentences of those jurors guided by such Laws are correct or not. Essentially Socrates implies that the people (Jurors) can make mistakes but the Laws they represent are infallible and any error in justice lies with the people, not the Law. This stance reflects Plato's further expositions of the Realms where absolute truth exists as a pure and supernatural realm of existence outside the influence of mankind. Socrates chooses to obey the process of Law in spite of recognizing the potential fallibility of the men involved in interpreting the Law in sentencing.
I believe the whole substance of Socrates's argument is about whether or not Socrates will uphold the very values and ethical statements he has personally advocated. If Socrates escapes and avoids the sentence of the State then he contradicts all things he has previously advocated up to that point and in doing so loses credibility. It is important, however, to note I am unsure whether or not this is the factual stance of Socrates himself or just the rationalization of the disciple Plato in trying to make sense of the whole event. Yes, Plato reflects a great deal of values learned by Socrates but this does not mean Plato was privileged to exact knowledge about what Socrates was thinking during this event that is described by the dialogues.
In short, the dialogue of Crito is to justify the death of Socrates as one Just and consistent with the teachings of Socrates as Plato understood them to be. This conclusion requires a complete examination of all Plato's works and then a reading of the dialogue in context of Plato's overarching narrative.
This is a summary and commentary on the dialogue "Crito" written by Plato. Source = "http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/crito.html"
The dialogue "Crito" by Plato is written as an account of Socrates's conversation with a friend named Crito. The topic of the dialogue is Socrates's upcoming execution sentence passed by the Athenian State on charges of corrupting the youth and something else, promoting Atheism I think. I will iron out the exact details later and revise this draft accordingly.
While the dialogue contains some interesting and significant concepts I believe it is imperative the reader understands that Socrates himself never wrote down any of his teachings during his life. Plato was a disciple of Socrates and thusly was highly influenced by the life and thoughts of the man. However, since Plato is the author of the dialogue it calls into question the veracity of the material when imagined against the potential teachings of Socrates. In the modern context several scientific studies in the field of psychology show that human memory is fallible, subject to internal censors of the individual and changes according to the personality and subjective perceptions of the individual remembering events. Since Plato is the author then it is reasonable to assume Plato has injected his own subjective perceptions, values, and personality into the construction of Socrates's teachings.
By no means do I intend to discount the entirety of the lessons available through Plato's dialogues but only to raise awareness that these dialogues are second hand transmissions of Socrates's teaching's filtered through the fallible medium of Plato's perception.
On top of Plato's bias coloring the whole dialogue I feel it's important to realize the text is a work of fiction where the author, Plato, writes out the entirety of the dialogue. This means Plato imagines and writes the part of Crito as well as Socrates. The construct of the dialogue gives the illusion of a recorded text written down by some stenographer taking dictation. This is not the case and is merely an literary illusion. All content is the work and produce of Plato's imagination and may or may not accurately reflect the values and opinions of Socrates.
To summarize the dialogue, Crito is an intimate friend of Socrates who is imprisoned by the Athenian State and is awaiting execution. The purpose of Crito's visit is to try and convince Socrates to flee from Athens and avoid execution. Crito represents himself and several interested parties who are more than willing to contribute their efforts and resources to rescue Socrates from death. The dialogue begins when Socrates awakes from sleeping to find Crito sitting with him in his cell.
There is some minor attention paid in the beginning text to establish the relationship between Crito and Socrates. They are friends and Crito is distressed by Socrates's predicament; so much so he is seeking to rescue Socrates from his situation and convince Socrates it is just to escape his sentence. This theme, whether or not it is just and good to avoid Socrates's death sentence is the central issue of the dialogue.
Crito presents arguments that the sentence is unjust because it deprives Socrates's friends and family of his wisdom and influence in their lives. The argument centers around the potential unjust nature of the sentence and it's effects in the lives of those who are intimate with Socrates; his children and his friends. A great deal of attention is paid on the potential perception of the public and their opinions formed by Socrates's actions allowing himself to be executed for what seems to be unjust reasons. Crito fears the public opinion may be that the friends of Socrates stood by and allowed him to be unjustly put to death instead of taking steps to rescue him when he (Crito) and his friends had the means to rescue Socrates.
I wonder if Plato is trying to deal with his own feelings of guilt in allowing Socrates to die when he had the means and the power to rescue him from his fate. This dialogue can be the process by which Plato alleviates himself from the guilt of not intervening in Socrates's sentence. Ultimately we must realize the sole author of this dialogue is Plato himself and all the text is the work of Plato's mind and not some recorded conversation between Crito and Socrates. It is, however, important to remind ourselves that Plato was a disciple of Socrates and was highly influenced by his teachings so the content of the dialogue is the best and closest we will ever come to understanding the nature of Socrates in this event.
Socrates counters Crito's argument with his own that ultimately states he must subjigate himself to the will of Athens and die as sentenced or he would otherwise contradict all of his prior statements, arguments, and ethics presented during the trial. Socrates argues he is bound by an implied contract with the State of Athens where as a willing citizen he agreed to uphold the Laws and decisions of the State regardless of whether or not the sentence itself is considered just and right. Socrates shifts all the impetus of Crito's objections as burdens of the jurors who tried and sentenced Socrates and not as burdens of consideration for Socrates himself.
Socrates's sole consideration is whether or not it is Just and good to obey or disobey a lawful sentence from the State of Athens. He concludes that he must obey the sentence regardless of whether or not it is justice because the Laws of the State are sacrosanct whether the sentences of those jurors guided by such Laws are correct or not. Essentially Socrates implies that the people (Jurors) can make mistakes but the Laws they represent are infallible and any error in justice lies with the people, not the Law. This stance reflects Plato's further expositions of the Realms where absolute truth exists as a pure and supernatural realm of existence outside the influence of mankind. Socrates chooses to obey the process of Law in spite of recognizing the potential fallibility of the men involved in interpreting the Law in sentencing.
I believe the whole substance of Socrates's argument is about whether or not Socrates will uphold the very values and ethical statements he has personally advocated. If Socrates escapes and avoids the sentence of the State then he contradicts all things he has previously advocated up to that point and in doing so loses credibility. It is important, however, to note I am unsure whether or not this is the factual stance of Socrates himself or just the rationalization of the disciple Plato in trying to make sense of the whole event. Yes, Plato reflects a great deal of values learned by Socrates but this does not mean Plato was privileged to exact knowledge about what Socrates was thinking during this event that is described by the dialogues.
In short, the dialogue of Crito is to justify the death of Socrates as one Just and consistent with the teachings of Socrates as Plato understood them to be. This conclusion requires a complete examination of all Plato's works and then a reading of the dialogue in context of Plato's overarching narrative.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)