I would not worry too much about what other's believe or think they believe. All a person should be worried about is if they know the truth. And
that shall set you free.
There is power in knowledge and power can be retained by knowledge which can be piece-meal and made into part and parcel. Assuming we know everything
is a foolish thought.
Besides that, Cass Sunstein, Obama's information czar, guru, or whatever he wants to call himself, can spin-doctor and color any conspiracy good or
bad. The truth is the truth, it can stand on its own, no matter how many attempts are made to cloud it or muddy the waters.
When the agenda of "leading the people by cherry-picked breadcrumbs" is taken, to avoid some paranoid threat from a group or person's opinion, that
person may realize one day they have fallen victim to their own false-beliefs and folly.
Never forget that human beings are very intelligent and have an innate capacity to see through the smoke and mirrors. There will come a time when no
authority figure will be able to control information totally. It's already passed this point. To keep with-holding information, good or bad, from
the people is a major mistake and places a major stumbling block in your neighbor's way, which should not be done. The truth can take care of
When a person in authority tries to influence many people by propaganda of academic and narrow perspective, they not only tarnish their own image but
the entire administration. Media do have effects and anyone can paint the truth with fallacies, but when we realize our assumptions and opinions are
not accurate, we must be willing to change and adapt. But to use propaganda against a person or group, against their freedom of thought and speech,
they might indeed find that the plan of "cognitive infiltration" may turn into "cognitive dissonance" when the realization they have now become the
"boy that cried wolf," too many times and no one believes them or their so-called "credible" academic theories.
Times change, so do morality and ethical viewpoints; to define a dynamic group of people with a term, which may become obsolete tomorrow, is sheer
Please remember these...
The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the
1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove
mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5 doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it
shall vanish away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly, but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
Additional (After reading Cass Sunstein's paper - www.law.uchicago.edu...
So, it is my understanding, after reading Cass Sunstein's "Conspiracy Theories," that the major objective is to achieve "cognitive infiltration,"
which corrects false beliefs of a group or individual with diverse information so truth will be realized? This is based on a logical assumption that
the "original assumption" is valid and contains no fallacies; but one thing is very important to see with this "technique," which is polarization.
Not at one time, was there mention of all or neither truths were either correct or incorrect, the perspective of the writer, as biased, is one of a
correct assumption. Which I argue, as a major flaw in theory, invalidates the theory due to lack of information. Yes, there is data, but is it
organized and complete, where it makes sense? There's one important piece missing. The assumption of the group or person that any assumption can be
wrong due to missing information, not data. Data is random and useless when trying to predict how a group of unique individuals interact on some
theoretical assumption, which can be based on fallacies, of subject matter which might contain highly spurious or imaginative rationale and thought.
Some could even think of this as "the flower" of an individual's expressive nature when allowed to grow and be alive. This process can even take-on a
life in and of itself, which is of a mystical nature; but nevertheless, is a form of expression.
Further, I argue, the nature of Sunstein's writing lacks other "diverse" disciplines and perspectives, to allow the esoteric knowledge, of each, to
flourish and fill-in to complete the numbers missing. Also, one can argue that academia, is too slow to assimilate rapidly occurring events in
present history combined with instant accessibility of millions. Which also, begs the question of why isn't the necessity of "informational
discernment" being stressed even more, to find correct information within an environment of eternal data? The time of "flat databases," which are
combined together, is over. Human behavior and social engineering embedded into media which is instantaneous, offers the human race more discoveries
than can be counted or one of the most dreadful nightmares anyone can imagine.
It seems as our level of responsibilities in every aspect of all of our lives just got bumped up a notch, and we must revise our moral and ethical
bases of how we do things. How we act. How we think. How we believe. And how we love, one another. Without this, the fate of humanity, forever
will remain on the brink. To think in a larger perspective is the goal for any person to achieve, with no bias, no assumptions which can cloud or
influence other person's free-will or thought, is desired and would seem to be a necessary ingredient in denying ignorance, in all its forms. Any
intention, to the converse, is bondage of the ascribed status of any race.
edit on 19-4-2011 by trekwebmaster because: (no reason