It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A hundred people can see the same event and each have a slightly different thought on the matter, would you not agree? With that thought, our brains will access previous information together with the new data and like a puzzle will shape that thought to fit into our previous picture of the world. If that data conflicts with previous data we will become confused and confusion compells us to find the error.
When I think of the brain, I visualize and am referring strictly to the energy involved (still acknowledging the energy may have a profound effect physically) complete with a unique frequency and wave pattern. Imagine 10 people in a room (or a million) and each brain transmitting its own frequency and wave unique to any other in the room. Emotions and thought also will either dull or intensfy the intesity of these electric signals. Which as you know, will effect every nearby current, plants, animals, etc...both manmade and natural.
We have controls for the population as well... psychiatry is an example. TPTB will use this under the cloak of medicine and caring in order to research and control that which is not understood or desirable in my humble opinion of course There are many examples as to other ways psychology is utilized to control/study many segments of people and their thoughts too.
To you see any potential for your personal paradigm progression to apply to larger society?
Will religious dogma be replaced by a more universal study synthesizing Eastern and Western ideology?
How did the norms of society contribute to your thought evolution?
Would you have experienced these breakthroughs sooner if education was in line with your concepts of oneness, or maybe you would never have been motivated to truly seek were it not for an element of dissatisfaction?
Originally posted by MassOccurs
reply to post by asciikewl
Highly interesting... Graves is/was a professor at Union College, which is right down the road from me.
Any opinion on what the prevailing color of America would be? Possibly mixing toward yellow?
And am I right that you see shifting ideology as more of a natural cycle as opposed to the result of covert manipulation?
The sequence in very brief, with the colors as mnemonics as per Spiral Dynamics are:
I should really start a thread about this
Originally posted by MassOccurs
reply to post by asciikewl
Enlightening take,
The sequence in very brief, with the colors as mnemonics as per Spiral Dynamics are:
I'd appreciate if you could elaborate on the process of associating certain colors with various attitudes. Is the color itself important or just a means of separation? For example, the color red is quite ambiguous in meaning to people. Many associate it with love just as aggression. I'm not familiar with the term mnemonics...
You certainly seem to have some concepts that aren't well discussed and substantial background sources, but we might as well keep the discussion here so my profile can mostly benefit from it (my Redness is showing) .
btw...wikileaks...that cant be a coincidence right?edit on 15-8-2012 by MassOccurs because: (no reason given)
So when it comes to thought manipulation your first association is the psychology establishment... Find that interesting and definitely agree, and it sounds like you think the problem lies in faulty assumptions with regard to physics and neuroscience and the way the education system will have you view the mind.
They don't talk much in school about the physical chain reaction that takes place as the brain is thinking. We are led to believe that the mind is fully contained within the limits of the cranium.
I think you hit on a possible major scientific paradigm shift, which is a tangible interaction between mind and environment and the potentials involved including "psychic" stuff, which may just be a perceptive aptitude to this mind/environment interaction.
You mentioned TPTB, how far do you think the manipulation goes? Did they facilitate major shifts, for example, toward Darwinist evolution? That was a major development that greatly increased the influence of the scientific establishment as a whole...
The manipulation is devastating (in my opinion). It would takes months of study just to absorb and accept just a small part of what is being done to the children... depending how long you stay in shock maybe much longer. I have been following some things for over 25 yrs and I only know part of what has and is being done. You can tell it, gives examples of it, point out the legislation, show results of it...and well....*shrugs...people feel helpless I guess.
When the subject — in this case, a lab researcher — viewed an unexpected result, the scan showed a dime-sized area of activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. As this Wired profile of Dunbar explains, that's like the brain's "delete" key. Now, as any editor can tell you, a delete key is a wonderful gift: by cutting out the chaff (of prose, of data, of life) we can see the wheat that much more clearly. The brain's process of filtering is what helps us pay attention. But for a scientist — or anyone in the business of discovery — if you habitually mentally delete anomalous data, how can you learn from it?
And here's the kicker: though we think of being wrong as aberrant or unusual, in truth we're wrong astonishingly often.
This brings me to a point that I hoped would come up... In order for a paradigm shift to happen, people have to realize that the way they are currently viewing things is wrong/flawed. This can be a very difficult realization, and is often met with denial. This comes from an article on a Harvard blog about the brains response to an unexpected find and having beliefs challenged:
Doublespeak is language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. Doublespeak may take the form of euphemisms (e.g., "downsizing" for layoffs, "servicing the target" for bombing [1]), making the truth less unpleasant, without denying its nature. It may also be deployed as intentional ambiguity, or reversal of meaning (for example, naming a state of war "peace"). In such cases, doublespeak disguises the nature of the truth, producing a communication bypass.[2][3] However, euphemism is not the same as doublespeak. It will not be considered as doublespeak if it is used appropriately and without the intention to deceive. For example, using "passed away" to suggest somebody is dead is an appropriate use of euphemism.[4]
Doublespeak is a term I wasn't well acquainted with, and it fits this discussion well. Sure, our times have improved communications in a sense with internet, phones, etc but a lot of people are missing essential points and shutting down mentally because of the deception factor. But I'm not sure there's any way to prevent words from having multiple meanings. I often find myself in a memory of a conversation and it dawns on me that there was a lot more to what was being said than I interpreted at the time... Young minds are so easy to fool that even if giving an honest effort at providing truth, the child may find a way to distort it. I've certainly been the culprit of this and would say theres a near 100% probability that I'm still operating on some faulty assumptions and misinterpretations. I guess the key is to try and take an active role in progressing personal paradigms instead of remaining in a reactive state to the assertions of others. Then, the hope is that an improved personal attitude/belief will somehow rub off on those around you. Maybe early education should emphasize philosophy over "facts."
Prioritizing philosophy.... As an approach not a particular one. I think the education system doesn't do justice to impact that Socrates, Jesus, Buddha, Confucius had on the world. Give kids the tools to think with before the thoughts. Emphasize the different approaches to life/learning. The seperation of church and state shouldn't cause us to avoid histories most influential figures. Also provide a stronger sense of morality based on history.
Start by teaching how elusive/subjective fact and knowledge really are, follow with the popular approaches while withholding judgement. When we learn science it's not often mentioned that the content will most likely be obsolete in 100 years.
Does the body die when the heart stops? Or does it multiply into billions of new lives in the form of decomposers and bacteria? It's easier to claim universal truth based on religious intuition than science/logic. You're entire body could be an illusion all together. I reccommend the movie Source Code, came out 2011, real good.