A revolution in thought

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Come on now! I wished your son well on his oral exams, and I'm glad he passed. Can't have too many first-rate radiologists, dontcha know!

Excepting that, though, I admit having no basis in fact for opposing the "complete and total son of a bitch" moniker.

I thought you'd like it. Maybe you should make it your avatar.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Instead of suing the President for no reason? How about seeking some help from a mental healthcare professional. That seems like a good step zero.

He didn't need a healthcare professional. He use to tell me that psychiatrists needed their heads examined. I hope no one's a psychiatrist in here.

[Naru]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

He didn't need a healthcare professional. He use to tell me that psychiatrists needed their heads examined. I hope no one's a psychiatrist in here.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

So if you don't, why do you care how the introduction sounds? Why would you try to help someone to improve on a book you believe is valueless? That makes a lot of sense.

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

It's well established that I have an unhealthy fascination with crap. I'm giving you some of the reasons why I think this book is crap, it's a study in anti-aesthetics to me.

It's not anti-aesthetics; it's just anti-injustice.

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

If you think the work could be improved on by a better editor - hire one!

As Suze Orman says: "Show me the money."

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

Good luck with that. I don't think the book is worth anything more than a sad chuckle. If you think that the book is the greatest gift to mankind, then it's worth it to you to fork over and improve its presentation to the world.

I'm sorry you are disappointed with the book, but you haven't read it, so what do you expect? It is the greatest gift to mankind if it can accomplish what it promises. Don't you want a world without war and crime, or is this something you have to think about first? And how can I fork over money to improve its presentation when I have no money? Maybe you know how to grow money on trees, but I don't. So people are going to have to deal with the bad form, the bad presentation, and the bad grammar to get to the good stuff. And I don't need someone to respond by saying, "What good stuff?" This is getting old.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Naru

You wouldn't happen to be a psychiatrist, would you?

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Maybe you should make it your avatar custom user title.

Done!

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

I believe this thread, in spite of the spirited debate has somewhat missed the most important point. The participants have been dancing around on peripheral issues but have not addressed the main idea that is clearly stated in the title of the book. Lessans states that by addopting certain ideas and implementing specific principles we can eliminate all evil from the world. At face value this appears to be a grand and noble idea that seems obvious at first glance, and who would argue against it? However just as any other concept, it must be considered form all sides, indeed failure to do so have lead to many historic errors of policy. Lessans claims that implimenting his ideas would lead to greater economic prosperity, but is this true? In reality it would be an economic disaster. To eliminate all evil would first of all eliminate all crime, after all crime is a kind of hurt, and without crime there would be nothing for criminals to do.

That's actually very perceptive. But we don't keep criminals around just so there won't be an economic downfall. We don't keep sick people around just so doctors can stay in business. Actually, there will be a huge number of people displaced but no one can get hurt by the way the new economic system is set up.

Originally Posted by thedoc

That is a lot of people out of work and that would be only the first blow to the economy. Without criminals there would be no need for Law Enforcement, indeed there are to be no more laws as everyone would be honest, and know what is right and wrong, and have no desire to do wrong. That would eliminate the political bureaucracy who make the laws, along with the IRS, since everyone is now conscientious and honest all taxes would be paid on time and in full. There would not even be a need to check the returns, just deposite and dispurse, a largly automatic system. There would also be no need for the court system or the prison system, thats a lot of people out of work, unemployed, on welfare. And probably most detrimental to society and the economy is that there will be no jobs for Lawyers. Can you imagine the chaos and havoc with these unemployed Lawyers on the street with nothing to do, all the street gangs and motercycle gangs will be hiding in terror, rather than pursuing their normal productive activities. No friends the onset of the 'Golden Age' would be a complete and utter economic and social disaster, there aren't enough Burger joints to absorb that many people flipping burgers and frying fries.

PS. Did I mention that the medical profession would be decimated with the elimination of all those stress related illnesses. On the up side all those unemployed Doctors and Psychiatrists on the street would help to keep the lawyers in check, have you ever seen dueling golf clubs?

You're going to have to read the book to find out how this new economic system works. But here are some of the industries that will be displaced.

In spite of the fact that many people will not be happy about
losing their profession, they will be forced to look for something else
because their services will no longer be needed. Soon to be displaced
are judges, juries, lawyers, the entire penal system, crime investigators,
intelligence agencies, liability insurance, every kind of license granting
permission to do something, all printed forms to check on your
honesty, credit cards (all but the IBM), travelers checks, money
orders, the banks as a place to safeguard money, and all tax adjusters.

The unions will be displaced not only because they blame employers
for not paying enough wages, but also because they try to prevent
abuses to employees using force. Also displaced are all collection and
credit investigating agencies. The first blames someone for not
paying his bills and the second checks him in advance to see if he will.
When a creditor tries to get his money by sending collection notices,
he blames his debtors and gives them unconscious justification to
shirk this responsibility.

The debtors will be permitted to hurt their
creditor if they want to, but they won’t want to under the changed
conditions. Knowing in advance that the creditor will never ask them
again for what they owe him since they know he will consider their not
paying him back a compulsion over which they have no control —
even though they know it is not beyond their control — they will be
compelled, of their own free will, to desire paying back every penny
since it gives them no satisfaction to be excused when every bit of
justification has been removed.

Personnel departments and
employment agencies are displaced because they are employed to
screen applicants, which blames them for being dishonest about their
qualifications. A great many employers do not want to hire certain
types such as Jews, Hispanics, Blacks, etc., and the agency screens this
aspect also. Whatever the reason, since blame is present in some
form, these agencies get displaced.

It is obvious that an employer is
anxious to get the best possible employees for the jobs that are
available, which is the reason he screens his applicants. However, this
screening is a definite form of tacit blame which justifies any efforts
to lie in order to get the position. But when an applicant knows that
he is not going to be questioned as to his qualifications; when he
knows that he will never be blamed regardless of how many mistakes
he makes; that he will never be criticized or punished by being fired,
he is given no choice but to forgo any job for which there is the
slightest doubt in his mind that he may not be able to handle.
Therefore, by removing this tacit blame every individual who seeks
employment is compelled to prefer developing a skill so that he can
apply for a job with the confidence that he will never hurt anyone due
to his lack of ability.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Done!

At least you admit it. Hey, I like that kind of honesty.

[specious_reasons]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Don't you want a world without war and crime, or is this something you have to think about first?

It's so cute that you think Lessans' ideas have any chance of fixing the world's problems.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

And how can I fork over money to improve its presentation when I have no money?

I really don't care. Motivated people get things done. All I can tell you is that practically no one is willing to wade through that book in its current form, and if they ever get to the section on vision, you'll lose the rest.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

You do not understand the two-sided equation, thedoc, nor have you read the treasure trove of lulz that is Chapter 6 of The Sacred Text.

Had you done your required reading, you would understand that in the New World all citizens will have a guaranteed standard of living. One becomes a citizen by taking a written test and signing a promise never to blame any fellow citizen for anything. The test will cover the two-sided equation among other topics. Lessans wrote that the test will be very easy to understand, even for little children. That claim is more than a little dubious, though, considering that in peacegirl's extensive sojourn around the Internet she apparently has not encountered anyone who understands the two-sided equation to her satisfaction.

Anyhoo, every citizen will get an ID number to be displayed on both a card affixed to the citizen's clothing and a tag affixed to the citizen's vehicle. All this is necessary to distinguish citizens from noncitizens during the transition to the Golden Age.

Once the United Nations is convinced that Lessantology is "scientifically undeniable," it will set up "IBM computer offices." Those offices will be linked to one another and to something called the International Bureau of Internal Revenue. All this is necessary to implement the economic guarantees of Lessantology.

Military personnel, police officers, politicians, the judiciary, lawyers, insurance industry employees, banking and credit industry workers, labor union personnel, etc. are out of work in Golden Age. Why? Because their jobs are inherently blame-related and there will be no blame in the novus ordo seclorum.

Actually, there may yet be room for some politicians, namely legislators. Earlier in this thread peacegirl informed us that there will be "lawmakers" even though there will be no laws. Personally, I think peacegirl's view on that subject is merely further evidence of a growing schism within Lessantology, a p. impressive feat for viewpoint with only one living adherent.

Be that as it may, every person who loses his or her livelihood as a result of the transition -- and in fact everyone who has a job at the time of transition -- is guaranteed his or her accustomed income level for life. That's right, everyone has the security of an Art. III federal judge in the Golden Age!

That shit rocks! Personally, I'm looking forward to a permanent blame-free vacation at citizen expense. It is my path of greater satisfaction. Fuck this work noise. To quote The Anointed One:

Oh yeah. $$ 4 life! Ol' Seymour thinks it'll be impossible to take the money, but I plan on proving him wrong.

No provider of goods or services will ever raise prices, nor would anyone strike for higher wages or better working conditions, since doing so would be a First Blow. It's okay, though, since consumers are free to pay much more for the actual price for the goods or services at issue.

I know you're trying your best to make Lessans the butt of your jokes, but surprisingly you did pretty well in the beginning, but you're failing on this part. You can leave your job to find a better one, if you want. No one is stopping you from increasing your standard of living.

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Moreover, those pesky poor folk will finally stop bitching about their lot in life. After all, "[h]ow is it possible for these poor people to blame others for their own misfortunes when nobody is to blame for this economic plight? Obviously, this won’t put food in their mouths, clothes on their backs, and give them decent shelter in which to live."

No probs though, since taxpayers will be compelled, of their own free will so to speak, to provide the poors a "livable wage." That's right, the Koch Brothers, Rand Pauls and Rush Limbaughs of the world will be only too happy to care for the poors.

Srsly.

You did real well at first, but now you're starting to lose the little bit of understanding you had. I suggest going back and rereading the whole chapter again. First of all, you can do anything you want in the new world. If you want to take advantage, there's not a soul who would stop you. He writes:

Anybody who makes his living by doing something that hurts
others has a choice to make. He can pass his examination and
become a citizen which guarantees his standard of living and allows
him to change his job without losing as a result of this change, or he
can continue to hurt others to earn his income with the constant
possibility of earning less while ending up in prison. Is he really given
a choice?

When a drug pusher becomes a citizen he will lose the
desire to push the sale of his products with misleading information
which means that once all available facts about drugs are made public,
and all blame withdrawn, the user will find very little satisfaction in
taking this chance of hurting himself, but if he wants to this will be
his business. The citizen will not find any satisfaction in remaining
in a business that hurts others under the changed conditions, and the
non-citizen, knowing that his standard of living is guaranteed when
he becomes a citizen and also realizing that just as long as he
continues to engage in illicit activities he is subject to the full penalty
of the laws, will be very anxious to study and pass his examination.
Let us imagine that some counterfeiter wishing to get out of his
present line of work because he knows he could get caught and go to
prison decides to become a citizen and receives a guarantee that was
estimated at $300 a week.

He then uses his IBM identification card
to buy a big mansion, several cars, an airplane, and many other things
on credit. He subsequently borrows a million dollars from the bank,
but when the very first payment in all these things is in default his
creditors go to his IBM office to collect their first installment.
However, just in case a mentally disturbed person did manage to pass
his examination, he would still be prevented from buying on credit
beyond his standard of living because his creditor will ask to see his
identification card and on it would be recorded the amount of his
guarantee.

If the purchase is too great, according to the judgment of
the lender or seller (remember, the installments must come out of the
guarantee, not out of his cash reserve), this transaction would be
reported immediately to his IBM office. If he did not buy beyond his
means but failed to pay his installments when due, we would pick up
his condition soon enough. However, the odds of a new citizen
hurting anyone as a result of being mentally disturbed will be virtually
nonexistent.

“But what if he makes a slip with his pencil or pen, and instead of
recording $100 per week, he adds an extra zero giving himself $1000,
and when we call him in to test his present state of mind after seeing
what he did we discover that he is not mentally ill?”
Once we have determined that he has no severe emotional
problems and that he deliberately wanted to hurt us, there is nothing
we can do because we know that he couldn’t help himself. We would
continue paying his creditors and if he used up his thousand dollars
and still did not want to work for a living he could steal more from us
because we would never blame him for hurting us this way. But he
knows that he doesn’t have to hurt us this way unless he wants to for
over this he knows he has mathematical control, and when it fully
dawns on him after passing his examination that we would never hold
him responsible for what he can never justify, he will completely
abandon all such ideas — unless he is really mentally sick.

Remember, everyone is going to be given a golden opportunity to
cheat and steal all he wants, if he wants to. This person doesn’t have
to make a slip of his pen, he can just as easily add in $10,000 or
$100,000, but why is this even necessary when all he is going to do
when buying something is hand somebody a piece of paper on which
is recorded the amount of the purchase?

If he wants to take a trip
abroad, and he doesn’t have the purchasing power, it isn’t first
necessary to enter in his book the amount he thinks he will need for
the trip because nobody is ever going to question his ability to pay, or
ask to see his record book. Consequently, all that is necessary is to
have a pad of paper and a pen or pencil for writing. He could board
the plane or ship, get the best stateroom or accommodations, eat the
best meals, tip the waiters very heavily, and live like a millionaire. In
fact, he never has to work at all and could issue slips of paper from
morning to night, but there is one other thing required for him to do
this with a clear conscience and that is he must be absolutely certain
he is not hurting others by what he does because if he is, and he
knows that he will never be blamed or punished for this, which the
people who are hurt must excuse and he cannot justify, then he will be
mathematically prevented from moving in this direction because the
very thought of it will give him no satisfaction whatsoever.

“But how does he hurt the people when he is paying them for
everything he buys, though the slips of paper are counterfeit? If I give
you a slip of paper for a television set, and you record this in your
book at the end of the day, you certainly are not being hurt; in fact,
you are pleased with the business for the day, right?”

“That part is very true, but the storekeeper is not the one being
hurt at that moment. The people who are hurt are those who desire
to buy the very things you have just stolen but can’t because these
things are now not available, which makes a mockery of their
purchasing power. Of what good is money on a deserted island?”

“There is none whatsoever.”

“Then what good is this purchasing power when the very things
you want are suddenly not available anymore?”

“Again, your money has no value in this type of situation.”

“Consequently, when a person steals he upsets the balance between
available merchandise, services, and the money with which to purchase
these.”

“I see what you mean. There would be less merchandise and
services, and more money.”

“Yes, and when that happens everybody will be forced to take a
decrease in their income, even the storekeeper who at first was so
happy with what appeared to be a sale. Now once each person
understands that he would be hurting everybody by stealing, and
further knows that he will never be blamed or punished for doing what
everyone knows he is compelled to do, when he knows he is not
compelled to steal unless he wants to, then he is given no alternative
but to relinquish the contemplation of his theft, because it cannot
satisfy him to be excused for this hurt when he knows it would be his
responsibility.”

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

It's so cute that you think Lessans' ideas have any chance of fixing the world's problems.

If you knew what I knew you would think differently, but you're not gonna learn anything if you have a despondent attitude before you even begin.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

And how can I fork over money to improve its presentation when I have no money?

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

I really don't care. Motivated people get things done. All I can tell you is that practically no one is willing to wade through that book in its current form, and if they ever get to the section on vision, you'll lose the rest.

If I'm not worried, you shouldn't be.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You did real well at first, but now you're starting to lose the little bit of understanding you had. I suggest going back and rereading the whole chapter again.

This is amasing, peacegirl is still acting so sincere, as if she actually believes that anyone else actually takes any of this seriously. No sane person can possably be that naive as to think there is anything to gain here. She and her father were so far off the deep end that even psychotherapy would not have helped, perhaps a new brain would be in order, wouldn't need to be very powerful, just a small one.

YouTube - ‪New brain from...

[davidm]

Originally Posted by thedoc

This is amasing, peacegirl is still acting so sincere, as if she actually believes that anyone else actually takes any of this seriously. No sane person can possably be that naive as to think there is anything to gain here. She and her father were so far off the deep end that even psychotherapy would not have helped, perhaps a new brain would be in order, wouldn't need to be very powerful, just a small one.

She's really something else, isn't she? More than 200 pages ago, the facts about Jupiter's moon conclusively demonstrated that real-time seeing is impossible. Since then countless more incontrovertible proofs have demonstrated the same thing. Efferent seeing, whatever the hell that is supposed to be, is conclusively ruled out by the anatomy and function of the eye. Every rational person -- every single person in this thread, except her -- understands all of this. Yet here she is, still pasting wallpaper-like stretches of quotes from her idiot father's mad ravings, as if the thread were just beginning and none of what she said had been refuted. I've honestly come to the conclusion that this woman suffers from some kind of mental illness.

[SharonDee]

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I will say that there is always a possibility that he could have been wrong (as possible as one plus one equals three).

You do not believe that there is any possibility that Lessans could have been wrong regarding something about which he was positive that he was correct.

Is that your position?

A simple yes or no answer will suffice. No hedging, qualifications or obfuscation, please.

[Kael]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

He writes:

He sure does.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

You do not understand the two-sided equation, thedoc, nor have you read the treasure trove of lulz that is Chapter 6 of The Sacred Text.

Srsly.

You can't imagine how relieved I am to see you affirm that, I was begining to think I might see some sense in Lessans hysterical writings. Thankyou for bringing me around to reality. I can now see the work in it's true sense as a work of humor, akin to 'Theatre of the Absured' BTW I just finished reading 'Waiting for Godot'.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

You do not believe that there is any possibility that Lessans could have been wrong regarding something about which he was positive that he was correct.

Is that your position?

A simple yes or no answer will suffice. No hedging, qualifications or obfuscation, please.

I am not going to answer with a yes or no. I am 100% positive he is right regarding determinism and the other two premises that lead to his first discovery. I also believe he was correct regarding efferent vision, but I won't say I'm positive until further evidence confirms his claim. And I'm sure he was correct regarding his third discovery on death, which was strictly based on astute observation and sound reasoning since, obviously, he hadn't died and collected empirical data. I'm sorry if you don't like my answer, but it's an honest one.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I am not going to answer in a yes or no. I am 100% positive he is right regarding determinism and the other two premises that lead to his first discovery. I also believe he was correct regarding efferent vision, but I won't say I'm positive until further evidence confirms his claim. And I'm sure he was correct regarding his third discovery on death, which was strictly based on astute observation and sound reasoning since, obviously, he hadn't died and collected empirical data. I'm sorry if you don't like my answer, but it's an honest one.

He was wrong about everything. His claims about light and vision are demonstrably wrong; it is in fact logically impossible for them to be right. His argument to determinism was philosphically inept; the argument formally both invalid and unsound. The rest of the stuff is just risable malarky, like rumpy-pumpy on the dinner table, etc.

You can't see this because even when confronted with the proofs of his errors, his grotesque wrongness, you shut off your mind and replace it with "Lessans is always right." This is the esence of cultism, of fundamentalism. Your closest kin are the young earth creationists and the flat earthers.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I am not going to answer in a yes or no. I am 100% positive he is right regarding determinism and the other two premises that lead to his first discovery. I also believe he was correct regarding efferent vision, but I won't say I'm positive until further evidence confirms his claim. And I'm sure he was correct regarding his third discovery on death, which was strictly based on astute observation and sound reasoning since, obviously, he hadn't died and collected empirical data. I'm sorry if you don't like my answer, but it's an honest one.

I believe you that it is honest, but it is not an answer. At least it is not an answer to the question that you were asked. Your refusal to actually answer the question is duly noted. Dodging direct questions is a tried and true method for building credibility, not!

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by thedoc

??

??

[LadyShea]

peacegirl, why did he reference IBM for everything? Did you consider updating that to something more generic?

[specious_reasons]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

peacegirl, why did he reference IBM for everything? Did you consider updating that to something more generic?

I found the references to IBM amusingly quaint. It's not exactly the powerhouse as it was when he wrote that...

I'd choose Microsoft as the replacement company. Other good choices would be Google or Apple. If you wanted to pretend you're serious, maybe choose Oracle.

[LadyShea]

Oracle was my thought because the idea seems databasey.

Then I thought International Bureau of Internal Revenue could be iBIR (pronounced I Beer) and I laughed at my own cleverness for the second time tonight.

[Angakuk]

Personally, I think that IBM is code that expresses how Lessans really feels about his own work. I think it must be an abbreviation for I Bowel Movement.