I posted an article from "Waking Times" Magazine, which if you took the time to read, was an essay dedicated to the sheer stupidity of human beings recognizing authority figures, without giving it any serious thought.
It was the author of that article that considered Einstein's quote relevant, and it was, I just copied and pasted the first paragraph.
I substantiate all of my assertions with the research I've done to acquire them. If you choose not to expose yourself to the research and quantifiable facts, you have made a choice to remain an ignorant fool.
This has nothing to do with Einstein, nothing to do with Nana, and nothing to do with you, or me.
I used the Milgram experiment as scientific documentation done using a scientific method to quantify the fact that human beings are quite capable of respecting authority without giving it any thought at all. It is highly relevant to the discussion, and completely backs up my interpretation of Einstein's statement.
You on the other hand, have offered absolutely nothing but your opinion as a counter argument.
Since you can't objectively substantiate your opinion, you may wish to apply some thought to your mental process, instead of regurgitating propaganda, and carefully reconsider your position.
HappyNow wrote: I’m picturing a lifeguard ordering people out of the pool. Authority on display. I know you can make the lifeguard a thug with a few well chosen words but it’s my picture.
I’m picturing a lifeguard ordering people out of the pool. Authority on display. I know you can make the lifeguard a thug with a few well chosen words but it’s my picture.
A couple of years ago, I already did the lifeguard scenario at an ocean beach where people regularly drown. People routinely get in over there heads because they think they know better. There is a heavy cost, to the state and the people when they wash up on the beach because they didn't heed the warnings and have no idea how to swim in rip currents. So in this scenario, I agree with you However, The results of the discussion were 20 people: fuck the lifeguards, let them drown and give them freedom (freedom they never had which was an illusion. And 1 person, there is a middle ground-that's me. Maybe you'll fair better at the argument, but I'm usually very thorough in my arguments.
My opinion was and has been that humans give away their authority. I don't want somebody using their power over me, ie politician to take away my money, and freedom. So I agree with Fix on that.
However, I will defer to an authority, a dentist, a car mechanic, a market analyst or even a boss when they have more experience or wisdom than me. NO PROBLEMS. It's a pleasure to be in those circumstances. Unfortunately, authority in politics (elected offices) are few and far between. I'm having a hard time of thinking of one at the moment.
So really there are two discussions going on because I know Fix will listen to somebody when they have proven themselves to be experts.
I do like Fixes call to discussing these things with specificity and reasoning. Otherwise, it's waa, waa, waa, waa, responding to waa waa waa. Of course, I engage in waa waa waa waa (as you've noticed) to those who don't earn the respect of engaging at the level of intellectual prowess that this forum portents to support. It's hard to come to discovery when peole are arguing, I believe in bears, I do, I do, I do .
Otherwise, I can be quite charming.
By the way, at some local beaches, after lifeguards leave. They have people that walk around with whistles telling people to get out of the water. The person gets out. The whistler moves on, and they go back in the water. So at the end of the day, they just ignore the authority anyway.
Of course, you can walk down to an isolate beach, without lifeguards and swim all you want. But if a lifeguard is on duty, (they are usually the best swimmers on the beach) than I'll listen to their instruction because they already identified the rip currents. But on really really rough days, they limit the size of the swimming area, and people are close together. But what happens is you can kicked in the face beause people are so close. That's when I ignore their authority but I don't do it infront of them. I just walk down the beach if I don't want to be kicked in the face because that sucks too.
do you BEL-ieve me, the Light or be-LIE-ve me?
I am the special one but not the choosen one.
Do I suffer from hubris, no but I am addicted to the water of life, whisky haha, must visit Scotland some day. I will elaborate on the stuff mentioned when I get back home.
Mr. Fix I put forth this:
Authority is evil.
I offer as evidence Milgram’s experiment. Where the subject is people. The subject, what’s being studied, is not authorities.
Do you see the problem?
Milgram is not an authority on authority. He is an authority on people’s response, conduct and the like.
In this case the authority was an evil one, because Milgram was attempting to show us all just how natural, normal it was to get sucked in by the Nazis.
What if another authority was introduced, let’s use your favourite, the man in blue, and he said ‘stop this at once, this scientist is a maniac, suspected of elder abuse and I need your help arresting him’.
Well we don’t know what would have happened. Some of the subjects certainly were ready to resist, and a leader, an au-thor-i-ty might just have helped them out of their mental conflict in a good way.
I'm actually spending this fine spring day under a beach umbrella in the snow, trying to repair some of the damage to my car from one of those wicked snowstorms last month. It is also good to come indoors and warm up occasionally.
If you don't think Milgram was an expert on authority then you don't think.
His experiment was specifically designed to quantify how people become subservient to authority when they are obviously not even under any type of coercion. His experiments demonstrate the extreme danger, and immorality inherent with the belief in authority.
Authority is nothing but an illusion, because if no one is subservient to it, it doesn't exist at all.
Yes, there is a distinction as to whether an authority figure is actually an expert in his chosen profession or field, and can impart knowledge to those who seek it, I have sought out such people in my life, for the purpose of acquiring skill sets that I now use to earn a living.
That is such a different concept, it deserves an entirely different word, but unfortunately, our English language fails to make many differentiations, usually to create the exact kind of mine trap you seem to have fallen into.
In your piece of shit pig crashing a scientific experiment analogy, only a moron would think anyone was actually being hurt.
If you're actually knowledgeable on this topic, the "victim" was only an actor. No one was harmed.
Using an idiot pig, in an idiotic example, only demonstrates idiocy.
Belief in authority is the most dangerous superstition.
GL I’m close to where you are on authority and have had the opportunity to regret each obeying and disobeying.
The lifeguard stories are insightful.
I used it because of a joke where I grew up that dileneated a difference between “Americans” and “Canadians”. Ruffian don’t look haha. The punch line is the Canadians all get out of the pool when asked. And depending where you live you may interpret as good, or bad. I liked that about the joke.
Thanks for taking it further, it does keep working.
I know Scott Adams says analogies are weak. I like to use them, not bigly.
For some reason this is bringing to mind the ‘gun argument’. Authority is not bad, but there are bad people who carry authority.
Mr. Fix wrote: I'm actually spending this fine spring day under a beach umbrella in the snow, trying to repair some of the damage to my car from one of those wicked snowstorms last month. It is also good to come indoors and warm up occasionally. Happy Now, If you don't think Milgram was an expert on authority then you don't think. His experiment was specifically designed to quantify how people become subservient to authority when they are obviously not even under any type of coercion. His experiments demonstrate the extreme danger, and immorality inherent with the belief in authority. ......
Snowing here too. In that way past when it should be sort of way.
Mr. Fix, GL may be right that there are now two subjects.
Im picking at your misuse of the science. Milgrave did not study what it takes to be accepted as authority, how to use authority to change the world for better, how to choose authority figures, etc. In that way it is an isolated experiment that shows only an evil authority.
I will give you this, it could support that evil authority influences people in an evil way but that’s as far as it carries.
I knew you wouldn’t like a cop in the role of a good guy. Maybe one day I’ll stop but I keep hoping your blindness is not permanent. The example is not idiotic, it would study the effect of a corrective authority.
And I am not an idiot.
So in the end I reject you as an authority on idiocy despite your time and experience in it.
Making use of a double post.
Maybe it wasn’t clear. The cop comes into the experiment as the original one is underway. You know the scene where the dude administering shocks is all upset and does not want to carry on. He is convinced to carry on, as we know. But what if in the moment of maximum conflict SuperCop shows up and says ‘stop at once in the name of the law!’ and then has some ask that will cause some fake pain for someone, although I guess they couldn’t be perceived as ‘guilty’ or deserving punishment, maybe just suspicious. Yes it’s difficult to come up with a design where a good authority gets a person to do something painful and conflicting but that’s not my job, just my idea.
Slow but steady progress…
That applies to both Bondo land, and whittling down the absurd notion that imposing authority on anyone is ever legitimate.
It has become blazingly apparent that you refuse to even look at any of the evidence I have presented,
So we are just going to have to go with your interpretation of the Milgram experiment,
and your ridiculous assertion that Milgram did not study what it takes to be accepted as authority.
His experiment proved consistently, that approximately 66% of the time, it doesn't take anything at all other than a white lab coat to be excepted as an authority.
Worse, he also proved in these cases, that people were willing to apply deadly force in order to comply with perceived authority.
Now let's back up a little bit, and bring into this discussion the concept of a conscience.
Properly defined, a conscience is a human being exercising free will to determine if his actions are right or wrong.
Subservience to authority negates the use of conscience, making subservience to authority always wrong, because you have willingly abandoned your personal responsibility to determine the morality of your own actions.
Interesting that Green Lantern could not come up with an example of a person in authority worth listening to.
There aren't any.
Power always corrupts, mainly because once you place someone in authority, their sole motivation becomes to maintain their authority. That's why you can't find a good authority figure in power over others.
So for you to think that the problem is bad authority figures,, and everything would be hunky-dory if only we could get good authority figures, is delusional. Mandating subservience to authority is slavery, pure and simple.
That makes the entire concept evil, and I don't give a flying fuck what's some holy book says to contradict this.
Unless you are advocating for human enslavement, an incredibly demonic concept on its face,
You have no legitimate argument for the legitimacy of placing people in authority over others.
Why don't you take the time and research this,
The book I posted on "the greatest superstition" is a great starting point.
It doesn't get into the origins of this completely evil believe system, I've done that all by myself here.
But it does walk you through the abject immorality in believing that there is any such thing as a legitimate authority.
By the way, I wasn't calling you an idiot, but your arguments are based on pure stupidity.
I consider you misinformed, which puts you with the vast majority of people.
I will also concede that comprehending basic moral principles is beyond the scope of most peoples intelligence.
What you do with the information I've provided for you, is entirely up to you.
If you're like most people, you will just ignore it.
Now, back to my Bondo...
Mr. Fix I hope the Bondo went well despite the temp and snow.
I have to hit the road now and as you know my participation here is sporadic.
Thanks for taking the time to make your thinking clear to understand. I still think there exists appropriate delegation of my personal authority and that there is a way to make it work.
"You can respect the authority of an imaginary sky daddy, who will cast you into an imaginary fiery inferno for all of eternity"
I now think the Pope lurks here, reads your posts, and you are starting to convert him. I read that he recently said that there is no hell; bad asses simply cease to exist.
Maybe just more fake news though, as GL asserts it all is (and I agree).
If I mis-paraphrased you, it wasn't intentional, sometimes I don't address comments for days, and I might not have gotten the exact wording right.
And I don't mind discussing my past, it's a contributing factor to who I am today.
Yes, there is some residual anger, if the concept of a fully grown adult pounding a child into submission doesn't create an emotional response, you're emotionally dead. I know that doesn't describe you, but if you think it's contributing to a bias concerning my point of view regarding authority, despite the fact that I have offered nothing but legitimate and well articulated arguments supporting my position, that's okay too.
The way I characterize authority figures, is just my way of pointing to the absurdity of having them in charge over anyone.
The only thing my childhood actually contributed to, is alerting me to what happens when you hand a psychopath the authority to govern over others. What follows is nothing but immoral, and demonstrably criminal behavior.
To question its legitimacy, didn't come recently, it started 50 years ago for me.
I've only recently started collecting corroborating evidence to support my assertions.
By the way, our super duper solid second amendment president, isn't going to do jack shit about this, or any other town that wants to do the same.
The assault on our second amendment is accelerating.
Illinois Town Bypasses Constitution, US Citizens Given 60 Days To Turn In Guns Or Become Criminals
Residents of a town in Illinois were just handed down an unconstitutional decree from their local government, they now have 60 days to give up their guns or be fined up to $1000 per day...
This is what happens when you vote for a power-hungry lying sack of shit.
I watched those video's and both of those video's are absolutely correct. People will follow authority without question. And I've posted probably dozens of video that make the same point in different ways.
Remember this one? The Mind REader. I revealed the trick on numerous occaisions. He is not mind reading, he is influencing.
I posted another which I can't find at the moment where people sitting in a waiting room and everybody is on it, and they all stand. And then person see's and then feels out of place, and so she stands and they do weird things and she follows suit. One after the other, after the other.
Then I posted the Black Lives Matter video at a Trump rally. All booing him one moment, and the next moment they are all applauding. Like taking candy from a kid. That easy.
AM gave his own testimony using the idea of a wave.
Then I discussed pools of consciousness or cliques. That's what happens in highschool, this group sits together based on some shared quality, the smart people, the dumb people, the jocks, the good looking people, the black people, the white people. Most people gather together on superficial things.
Yeah, this is all cognitive science. Why people act the way they do, how to get people to act the way you want them to act.
The issue is POWER. The use of POWER to control. All these things above lies outside of the interest and understanding of most people. They have no defense. I made the point to you that control forces can be so subtle, like the mind reading experiment, you dont know it's being done to you and EVEN more subtle than that.
The founders had two issues to deal with. How to keep put checks in the constitution to keep the powers of government limited. They also had a second challenge, how to keep the mob mind at bay. Ben Franklin and the other founders were high class, well educated men. They wanted to keep the mob at a distance. Don't think these guys were hanging out with the people and shaking everybodies hands. Nope. They wanted nothing to do with the mob.
You have rightly ascerted:
You are trying to figure a way to circumvent #2 and #3. Cultures ALWAYS controlled the people. Often it was through religion. The Laws of Manu for the HIndus'. Volumes and volumes of Canon Law. Fear etc....
Do you know why the Church has so many festivals, to occupy the minds and behaviors of the people. In another words, they keep them occupied because most people can't manage their own time and manage their own interests and pursue higher realms of study. They don't want them.
Same as government. Give the people bread and circus and you control their attention.
The founders have alot in common with myself. I don't want the mob handling affairs of the state. I don't want the mob near me EITHER. I know a mob scene when I see one.
You've ascerted in the past that people can manage themselves. People can't manage things they don't understand. that's why in Plato's republic the leaders are expotentially more wise than the street cleaner. But the street cleaner excepts his role and his happy to offer it, but the street cleaner doesn't pretend to be wise in how to manage the state and how to manage complex affairs derived from esoteric law.
So it looks like the checks and balances of the founders didn't work? Because they were smarter than the people who keeps electing them. So the government authority keeps growing and the people are clueless as to how they got so much authority. They gave it to them.
You can't circumvent #2 and #3. Somebody in the mob is going to assume the role of authority and use his power for his own gain by elminating any authority because as long as the mob still exists, we need some mechanism to keep them at bay. You know the ones that don't go out and work and steal all your food. The mob is incapable of electing the wiser authority that has the good of everybody and the state because they don't know any better.
It's one thing if a lifeguard blows his whistle to get you out of the water, because he wants to claim power over all the swimmers and keep the water clear for his enjoyment. It's another when the lifeguard blows his whistle because there is a shark 10 feet from your left food. It might not be a good time to yell, FUCK YOU. I DON'T LISTEN TO AUTHORITY. Because he might just swim out to you and slap a bloody steak on your leg and wish you good luck.
"Residents of a town in Illinois were just handed down an unconstitutional decree from their local government, they now have 60 days to give up their guns or be fined up to $1000 per day..."
A few days ago I posted that we the people should be talking with the local county sheriff wherever we live, to get the lowdown on how he/she feels about the 2nd amendment, and if he would back it, or the gun grabbers. It is a vital conversation to have, I think, the way things are going.
I know how you feel about authority, but like it or not, the county sheriff holds a shitload of authority on a local basis. By meeting with him, to find out his bent, we can decide to respect and support him, or to disrespect and vote him out.