Gather Around, Everybody Should Watch This~The Greatest Talk of Jacque Fresco, page

I did a thorough search. Please, shoot me down if this is a duplicate thread, if it's in the wrong forum please move it.

Let me start by saying.. I'm not a huge fan of the Venus Project. I told myself I'd watch just the first 5 minutes and I ended up watching the whole 42 minutes. There are conspiracies saying - "Oh, The Venus Project is New World Order." - "The Venus Project is Communism!" I don't know about all of that. For I have not looked into The Venus Project all that much.

Okay. With that said, in the video, Jacque Fresco doesn't even talk about his project. Instead, he talks about society. What's wrong with it? The bottom line is that our "leaders" are not educated enough. They who we elect to make intelligent decisions.. Are not intelligent at all, for that matter, neither are we as a people. For example, In this short clip of Neil DeGrasse Tyson, he ponders why their aren't many other elects in Congress other than those of "Law" if you can call it that.

It's at the 2 minute mark if you don't want to watch the first minute and a half. (Which is also interesting.)



Fresco points out that everybody is essentially a slave to their inhabitance, their environment. We walk around everyday and question very little as to why we like certain things or why we are of whatever religion or practice we are why we think some things are right and wrong with our society and others etc.We're so boxed in that we can't see or even dare to understand each other and why THEY believe in something or why they like something other than what YOU like. Why they are different.. Why would you want to know? Of course.. this may not apply to most here at ATS, but bare with me. The things we believe are that what we are subconsciously made to believe. It's not your belief, it's somebody else's belief that you just happen to like and take hold of.

Fresco bashes Religions, Government, Military, and Civilization as a whole. We're not smart enough.. We are too bullheaded to see that we can have better, and WE SHOULD! I'm not saying Venus Project is the answer, no sir, no ma'am.... I don't know that but.. In this year 2013.. Don't you think that we should be further along than we are right now?

What's holding humankind back?










Liol's Deviantart







Yes.. All because we lack..



Education.. It needs to begin in the classroom.. Starting with the truth and possibly a better way of communication too.

Without further or do.. Please, please, please watch this video if you have the time, trust me it's worth your time and you'll get a few laughs out of it too

reply to post by Mizzijr

---

I agree something is holding us back. But a lack of education or intelligence just isn't the case IMO.

It's spiritual.

reply to post by randyvs

---

I can agree to that as well. Collectively speaking, we've lost touch with our inner calling. As I'm sure you'd understand, we have truly become a Male species. We need to get back to the Female then rebalance at some point.

Originally posted by Mizzijr
reply to post by randyvs

---

Collectively speaking, we've lost touch with our inner calling.

The real problem is much less mystical than that. And if you ask me "what is your inner calling?" I will answer "I don't know what you are talking about". And even if I understood you and if I had an "inner calling", chances are my "inner calling" is not the same as yours.

Part of the real problem is that we can't communicate properly. We use words that are meant to represent our thoughts, our emotions. Chances are my definition of "love" is not the same as yours, nor is my definition of "happiness" or of "freedom" or of any other concept that you can imagine. We all have different life experiences thus we all have different views on everything else. If I pronounce the words "sex" or "war" or "freedom", those words raise different thoughts/emotions for each of us, depending on our experiences which are unique for each of us.

But we have also invented another language, that which is used in science, and in science 1+1=2 in every part of the world, independently of history, culture or life experience of the individuals. We have actually invented a language that is universal, a language which in itself is a science, without which we couldn't have invented or discovered any other science or technology. The strength of that language is that it is well adapted to represent reality, and much more accurate than the language that we use in our everyday life. And with that language comes a method of evaluation of reality.

Why is it that we have all those technologies, all that knowledge, all those possibilities and at the same time we have the impression that we are stagnating, that things are actually getting worse rather than getting better ? Why is it that we are able to launch a robot on planet Mars, with all the knowledge and correct predictions that the feat implies, while at the same time on Earth we socially stagnate, we do the same mistakes over and over again, we build the same social structures again and again and they fail and fall again and again ? Why is it that there are two spheres of human activities that show such different degrees of efficiency ?

To be continued.. (maybe)

ps : there is a chance that everything I said is BS, and there is a chance that you have wrongly understood my BS.

reply to post by gosseyn

---

I don't see how " Different life experiences " give different meanings to words that have very clear definitions.

":Inner calling "

Think elephant graveyard. And if you haven't heard of it then get ur google on.

reply to post by randyvs

---

If you're so sure that the language we use is truly a common reference point perhaps you wouldn't mind proving it. I will tell you how you can do just that. You claim that words have very clear, and universally understood meanings. If this is the case, perhaps you can give me a definition of the word soul that everyone can agree upon?

Originally posted by renegadeloser
reply to post by randyvs

---

If you're so sure that the language we use is truly a common reference point perhaps you wouldn't mind proving it. I will tell you how you can do just that. You claim that words have very clear, and universally understood meanings. If this is the case, perhaps you can give me a definition of the word soul that everyone can agree upon?

soul
/sōl/
Noun
The spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal.
A person's moral or emotional nature or sense of identity.
Synonyms
spirit - mind - psyche - heart - ghost

The definition is clear. Doesn't matter if someone wants to disagree with a fact.

reply to post by gosseyn

---

You are basically saying the same bit Mr. Fresco said in the clip. I see where you're coming from. And I see where he's coming from.

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by gosseyn

---

I don't see how " Different life experiences " give different meanings to words that have very clear definitions.

Imagine I pronounce the word "sex" :
- If you are a priest who has never had sex in his life, the word will resonate differently for you
- If you are a porn star, who is having sex 40h a week, the word will evoke different feelings/thoughts for you
- If you have been raped, again the word will resonate very differently in your mind
- If you have been in a accident and you are paralysed, or if you have a sickness that made you impotent, again the word will trigger different feelings/thoughts for you.
The list is endless

I can do the same for "war"
- If you are a weapon manufacturer, the word will have a different meaning for you.
- If you have seen your whole family killed just in front of you in a time of war when you were a child, chances are you have been traumatized and the word will evoke different things for you.
- If you are a general in an army who is thinking in terms of strategies and tactics, the word will trigger different things for you
- et cetera..

I can do that with pretty much every word. Languages are auto-reflexive, and it means that in order for me to understand what you are really trying to say, I would have to use "the map of the map", "the map of you". Maps are not the terrain that they are meant to represent, just like words are not the things that they are meant to represent.

The map–territory relation describes the relationship between an object and a representation of that object, as in the relation between a geographical territory and a map of it. Polish-American scientist and philosopher Alfred Korzybski remarked that "the map is not the territory", encapsulating his view that an abstraction derived from something, or a reaction to it, is not the thing itself. Korzybski held that many people do confuse maps with territories, that is, confuse models of reality with reality itself. Jiddu Krishnamurti, the Indian philosopher, described it thus, "The description is not the described", to which he has further exemplified: "it is like a man who is hungry. Any amount of description of the right kind of food will never satisfy him. He is hungry, he wants food."

Map–territory relation

What is a chair ? If you sit on it, it becomes "something that you can sit on", if you hit someone with it, it becomes a weapon, if you throw it in fire and if is made of wood, it becomes fuel, etc.. Definitions are static and they do not have the required accuracy to describe the ever changing universe in which we live in. Where would you start to say what a chair IS ? By the macroscopic level ? Or by the microscopic level ? Or if it was possible, would you start by listing all the uses that have been made by a chair in human history ? And what about the potential of this chair, what about the future uses of this chair ? It is impossible to say what any thing IS, because it is a metaphysical question. And it becomes even more impossible (if that is possible) when we speak about ourselves. Please, try to tell me what a "human being" IS, and I wish you good luck.

Originally posted by Mizzijr
reply to post by gosseyn

---

You are basically saying the same bit Mr. Fresco said in the clip. I see where you're coming from. And I see where he's coming from.

Yes, because like him I have been deeply interested by General semantics

reply to post by gosseyn

---

What a bunch of hocus poke -us, enabling slight of hand, crap are they wasting peoples time, teaching 'em these
days ? A chair is never defined as weapon. It is only that of it's definition and no amount of made up, psycho- illogical BS, that enables someone to have a job pushing a pencil, is ever gonna change that. A chair is furniture and a rifle is a weapon. Period !

Look how what ever you've been taught, has totally and mercilessly confounded and confused you, under the guise of some kind of dreamed up intellectual crap ?

For the love of Pete mon.

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by gosseyn

---

"bunch of hocus poke -us", "crap", "psycho- illogical BS", "Period !"

"intellectual crap"

Any real argument ? Anything actually intelligent and insightful to add ? If not then please stay silent. Thank you, sir.

reply to post by gosseyn

---

Any real argument ? Anything actually intelligent and insightful to add ? If not then please stay silent. Thank you, sir.

Ah man, you should know better than to try a domineering tactic like that in a open forum for discussion. At least you were polite about it, I'll give you that. Sorry, but my position and view, of absolute crap, leads me to call 'em like I see 'em. If that displeases you, then I suggest you add something that generates the intelligent and insightful retort, you desire. Because quite frankly, asking for my silence will not suffice.

reply to post by randyvs

---

Do I really have to ask the question "Why do you think it is crap?". I thought I didn't have to ask that question, but it seems I do have to ask that question. So I ask again "Why do you think everything I said is intellectual crap ?". Please elaborate.

Originally posted by gosseyn
reply to post by randyvs

---

Do I really have to ask the question "Why do you think it is crap?". I thought I didn't have to ask that question, but it seems I do have to ask that question. So I ask again "Why do you think everything I said is intellectual crap ?". Please elaborate.

K, you seem like a really good person. Especially seeing the way you've tolerated the way I come off. So I'll lighten up. It's just that I see a lot of what is being passed off as an education these days as total B.S. This is a conspiracy site my brother. I'm not the only person you will find with at least a similar attitude. Take no personal offense, as none was made. And know that I'm confident in your intelligence enough to know that you will make a mental note of the things I've written. I assume you are still pretty young. Time will tell you why I think this way.

Peace

Bill Clinton Is Right: The Economy Really Does Do Better Under Democrats
  Posted 4 days ago with 46 member flags

I Changed Party Affiliation Today
  Posted 6 days ago with 20 member flags

Direct Democrcy
  Posted 12 days ago with 9 member flags

In The Belly Of The Beast.
  Posted 7 days ago with 9 member flags

I\'m confused about Ron Paul
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags

\'Emergency\' Tax on the Rich Roils Britain
  Posted 13 days ago with 4 member flags

2009 news report proves paul ryan was correct about plant closure.
  Posted 12 days ago with 4 member flags

What is the true definition of a Liberal?
  Posted 8 days ago with 4 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: