Integrity

[notavoter]

LOL oh my he said census taker. I had three census takers come to my door at different times. They would identify themselves and I would say "No, goodbye" and shut the door. The last one was so telling. As I was shutting the door he said something I cannot remember and I said "Well if you come back I will just tell you the same thing" As he was walking away huffing and puffing he said "Well when I come back I am bring a policeman" I laughed and said "Whatever dude"

It is amazing even with a government agent as seemingly benign as a census taker will eventually expose the violence and the guns

[zonsb]

(10-06-2011 10:21 PM)Jace: Johanson Wrote:  Zonsb, I'd like to hear where Stef made those appeals to authority.

I said what it was in my first post -- the post you made comment on. Here it is again: "With one instance he said if remote viewing were valid someone would have won James Randi's million-dollar challenge."

Quote:Don't take that to mean I feel it incumbant upon you to provide them for me...

Good thing you're no holding your breath for me to do that. The best I can do is say it is in one of his videos. Which narrows it down a bit. Though he may have said it elsewhere in a different video, podcast, article or ebook. If you were to hold it incumbent on me, you'd be out of luck because I wouldn't waste my time on such laborious endeavor. It took me enough just to decide to put forth the effort to help inform him of his error via my email to him. Do you know if he has since changed his stance that PSI is invalid?

Quote:It strikes me as so out of character for him, and that would make it so much the more troublesome if I came to the same conclusions with the same evidence from the horse's own mouth.

Like I said, I sent the email three or four years ago. The reason I tried to educate him was because it was troublesome to me that his appeal to authority regards the validity of PSI was supporting his ignorance rather than dispelling it with facts. Not to mention that his voice gave credibility to James Randi for his deceitful million-dollar challenge.

It seems to me a person that proclaims themselves to be a philosopher or researcher of the human mind would jump at the chance to validate or invalidate the claims of remote viewing. To learn about an awesome ability of the human mind and to know from first-hand personal experience that it is for real. I mean, come on, if they are of honest integrity in their profession they'd be all over it. It's perhaps understandable since this world where we live, cognitive dissonance has sunk its hooks quite effectively.

[Marc Stevens]

(10-05-2011 09:17 PM)Dionysus Wrote:  Also, I noticed that Stef hasn't been on Marc's show in a long time, and I can't help but wonder if they had some sort of falling out.

Not at all, he was busy with family, the baby had just been born, so he couldn't do regular spots every month. He's been on a few times since, usually when I am at liberopia or some other conference.

And I appreciate the comments, and let me add what I think is a good way to interact with the world

[zonsb]

(10-07-2011 06:48 PM)Marc Stevens Wrote:  And I appreciate the comments, and let me add what I think is a good way to interact with the world

What is common sense? Does a person believe what is common among many people?

Think of logical consistencies people perform in their jobs/work. Without giving specific thought to logical consistency people use it in most of their actions. They wouldn't be able to bake a cake without it or build a house or repair a car, play card game or board game or drive a car etc. Some things, like driving a car, we can do on auto-pilot because they are logically consistent actions imbedded in the subconscious mind via repetition. Or brushing your teeth. You don't rinse out the tooth brush and then rinse your mouth with water; put the brush to your teeth and brush them; then put tooth paste on the brush and then return the toothbrush back in its holder.

Perhaps the ultimate logical consistency and common sense is do not violate other people. People avoid that which posses a risk to them or they rely on sufficient protective measures. It could be safety goggles or not going too close to the edge of a cliff or looking both ways before entering an intersection. What do you know?

You know it means driving; you know it means to look to the left and to the right; you know you've already seen what is straight ahead and will see it again when you move looking from right to left; you know what is behind you you'll be moving away from, not towards. You knew all that inherently from this comment: "looking both ways before entering an intersection."

Another protective measure is paying taxes to avoid the negative repercussions of not paying the tax. For the same reason a driver pulls over and stops when the cop car behind you puts on the red and white or blue and white or red, white and blue flashers. (Interesting choice of colors.) When someone doesn't want to talk to us we don't force ourselves on them. We part ways.

The point is, if you want to wake a person up start with what they already know. Proceed to connect the dots they already have in their minds. Giving them a slight shift here and there while maintaining logical consistency.

“I don’t want to talk to you anymore and you have a nice day, goodbye.” John Webb knows it. He should leave his job as an attorney representing the pseudonym: STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. But he probably won't be doing that anytime soon.

I could write much more on the subject in depth and breadth; rather, what is common sense? How can it be utilized to deconstruct the anticivilization to create a voluntary society? How will a voluntary society benefit your audience -- be it one person or ten million?

What do you know about technology; some are thousands of years old yet surprisingly, they're illegal and/or effectively supressed. What do you know about exponential advancing technology and the law of accelerating returns? What made slavery viable? How does conscious man apply reason to solving problems that benefit himself and those in his community and perhaps the world populace? Who are the giants that advanced civilization? What did they do and how did they do it? How many giants/geniuses should there have been, would there have been, will there be in a voluntary society?

"The thought of how far the human race would have advanced without government simply staggers the imagination" – Doug Casey

The thought of how far the human race would have advanced had initiatory force not been institutionalized in government simply staggers the imagination.

Which of the above is swimming upstream fighting the current in people's minds. Which flows downstream with the current dot in people's minds? My gawd, we can't live without government. And then there's this: Of course no one should force a person to talk/associate with them. What is the goal? Will people who readily realize the common sense of the second statement (my rephrasing of Casey's statement) not lead to their realization of the first.

In your mind's eye, what do you see going on in a voluntary society, what does it look like, how are people interacting with technology, be it food, clothing, shelter, energy, health, education, money/finance, computers and etc? How will your audience know there is something worth aiming for? Freedom? They already believe they're free. Show them the great abundance that will naturally, and rapidly flow from true freedom in a voluntary society.