September 13, 2012




about words


Welcome to the About Words website. Below is a brief audio introduction to this site.

Did you know that one of the most popular words on the internet is God?

My Google Profile

On the creation of legal categories such as “murder”

October 7, 2015




  • Del Hamaker
    Del Hamaker So much for Thou shalt not kill….

    Like · Reply · 1 · 3 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn A better translation is “thou shalt not murder.” There were many wars commanded by God in the Old Testament, plus many other killings (of humans, of livestock, etc), and there were also intentional killing of humans by God, such as the great flood and the plague that God unleashed on the Israelites a few chapters earlier in the Book of Numbers (earlier than the above quote in the beginning of the post).

      Like · Reply · 1 · 59 mins
    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker I agree with the better translation. But flooding a planet is mass murder whichever way you slice it.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn You are correct, indeed. However, “Thou (not me but thou) shalt not commit mass murder without divine permission” is not the same as “I, the Lord God of the Armies of the Israelites, will not exterminate any species or decimate any planets.”

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker Divine permission or no, murder is murder. One cannot profess to be perfect and then cover up imperfect creations by murdering them without also being a hypocrite. It almost seems as if the great I Am is a sociopath.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn When Abe Lincoln was assassinated, that led to VP Andrew Johnson becoming President. The new President, in an intriguing twist, legally pardoned several of the convicted conspirators in the assassination of Lincoln.

      Murder is not murder until a sequence of government rituals results in the charging of suspect with murder. Until, the ruling is complete, there is only a murder charge, not an official ruling of murder.

      The rituals of investigation, indictment, and criminal prosecution may result in the creation of a ruling of murder. Of course, the TV news broadcast may say “President Lincoln was murdered yesterday,” and, within the context of how they are using the word, that is fine.

      If a government passes a law to create a new rule on whether or not it is “murder” to kill a slave or a Native American or an unborn fetus, that involves another set of rituals. Where do all of these modern government rituals come from? Most come from the Hebrew prophet Noah with the 7th commandment (to supplement the prior 6), which was the commandment to “establish courts of justice” (to quote the popular translation in to English).

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn https://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/noahide.html

      The following are the seven commandments, comprising six negative precepts and one positive. There is much more that remains as explanation and commentary, but this article will limit itself to a few insights after presenting the list itself.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn From a 1991 Resolution of the US Congress:

      designate March 26, 1991, as `Education Day, U.S.A.’.

      Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded;

      Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;”


    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker I disagree. Murder is murder without other men (and women) I.e. the court system saying it is so.

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker If I kill someone in cold blood, and no one ever finds out about it, have I still committed murder? Or, if a tree falls in the forest with no one to hear it does it make a sound? Of course it does.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn That is simply a claim that you assert. Your statement would have no authority in a court ritual.

      Even in the case of OJ Simpson, there was no real doubt that the people were murdered. In that sense, “anyone can say that it was a murder.” So, I agree with you in part.

      However, what if a police officer, who was legally performing his duties, killed both OJ’s ex-wife and the innocent bystander, and then that police officer died (so as not to be able to report the lawful killings)? Then, they were actually not “murdered.”

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn Murder is a legal category. A cold-blooded killing in a public ritual of human sacrifice as an agent of a government is not legally categorized as murder.

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker The same could be said of your claims. Since we are speaking of biblical issues, there was no court system when Cain slew Able.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn OJ won the murder case. He lost a civil lawsuit for “unlawful death,” which is not the same legal category.

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker Legalities be damned. We are not speaking about legalities but the taking of human life.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn I was referencing the language used to reference the taking of human life. “Slay” is one word that fits. So is “murder.”

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker And yes, human sacrifice, regardless of the perpetrator, would be murder. Writing it down on paper that it isn’t changes nothing.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn If you are calm and interested, you might study the Hebrew texts and note that the slaying of Abel was not referenced as what in English we translate as “a murder.” Different Hebrew words can be used to refer to two similar events so as to emphasize a contrasting element, even though the events may be quite similar.

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker More writing on paper…

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn If you wish to ridicule someone like George Washington because he killed a lot of humans, you might attract some gleeful social validation from other people. I would not be one.

      Writing your ridicules down would not change the words. It is not the speaking of the word “Washington” that made a certain northwestern state in to the state of Washington. What created that tradition (of calling the state “Washington”) was a ritual of a government that was backed by a huge concentration of military capacity.

      The current warlords said “we are naming this state after a prior warlord.” Various tribes may have called the same area by other names. But if you want to send mail through the USPS to that region of the world, it could be useful to identify the state as Washington by the code “WA.”

Emotional stability and political hysterias

October 7, 2015

The following content is intended to identify people who are unusually stable emotionally. The process will involve a short sequence of ideas. Those who experience shame or other emotional instability upon exposure to those ideas can stop reading at that point. Of course, once they calm down again, they would have the option to continue. After the brief presentation of provocative ideas, then I welcome comments and inquires from those who are either already emotionally stable or are motivated to further develop toward emotional stability.

Review each of the following statements and then indicate whether you agree or disagree with that statement.

“The reason that there should be mandatory vaccinations is that it would protect the health of people who have already volunteered to receive vaccinations. The reason that people who have volunteered to receive vaccinations need to be protected is because vaccinations result in absolute immunity so that any exposure to a particular virus would be of no danger whatsoever to the vaccinated individual.”
“The most important current political issue is the issue of police brutality. People may feel intimidated by the police when they see and hear about cases in which armed police officers kill or brutally attack passive, unarmed citizens or even pets. If there is one thing that governments should avoid, it is the possibility of citizens feeling intimidated by the police. Therefore, the obvious solution to reduce police brutality is to reduce the access of civilians to weapons such as guns. In fact, a total ban on gun ownership by private citizens would be ideal. The police would have their combat training and advanced weaponry including attack helicopters and sniper drones. The law-abiding private citizens would have no legal access to any weapons whatsoever. So, with a total legal monopoly on deadly weapons, the police would no longer be experienced as threatening to the members of the public. There would be an instant and permanent end to all instances of police brutality as well as the unnecessary killing by police of the pets of private citizens. We would all be able to avoid feelings of intimidation, of grief, and of guilt. Also, anyone who does not agree with any of this statement should be indicted, prosecuted, and then mercifully executed in a well-publicized public ritual of human sacrifice.”
“The biggest problem with this country is the interference of governments into the private business of civilians. For instance, for 100 years there has been a privately-owned financial institution called the Federal Reserve. In order to protect private citizens and businesses from government interference, the private Federal Reserve System must be immediately abolished by the government. By banning the private Federal Reserve system, our holy  government will demonstrate their heroic commitment to respecting the private rights and interests of civilians.”
Select one of the following two options (whichever fits best for you):
“I found at least one of these statements to be offensive. However, I am attracted to the idea of being more calm and stable and less easily offended.”

“I found some of these statements to be very familiar (as in similar to things that I have said or that I have witnessed other people saying). I consider all of those statements to be hysterical as in hilarious. I am not terrified of logic or intelligence. I respect them. I value them. I am very interested in further developing my intelligence and my capacity for logic and discernment.”

The current political and economic systems may continue more or less as they already are. The military superiority of government troops trained in organized violence may continue to intimidate and dominate the general public. A variety of very popular hysterias may continue to be promoted by the mainstream media and even by mainstream schools.

None of those possibilities would in any way prevent us from exercising logic, developing calm alertness, and cultivating intelligence. Our opportunity is to be as perceptive as possible and then to take actions that are as prudent, precise, productive, and profitable as possible.

October 5, 2015








Right below the photo is my introductory comment and then quite an exchange on the nature of currency systems.






This is kind of an odd question (in the image). If I sign a 12 month lease to rent a place to live, that is the creation of a legal debt. If a government invents a fine for driving above a certain speed limit and then says that I owe them $100,000 for speeding, that is also the creation of a legal debt.

Generally speaking, governments are systems of inventing legal debts (“out of thin air”) and then extorting / coercing the human resources to seek out a government-approved currency in order to pay the government enough wealth to cover the debts invented by the government and thus avoid arrest, imprisonment, confiscation of property, and of course public rituals of human sacrifice.



Jeanette Perez, Christine Kraus, James Levreau and 24 others like this



  • David Limacher
    David Limacher Erase the debt.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn David, please read my comments above the photo. Erasing declared debts would in no way prevent the declaring of new debts (by consent in contracts or by coercion through governing systems).

    Like · Reply · 3 · 22 hrs
  • David Limacher
    David Limacher Yes much needs to change…

  • David Limacher
    David Limacher I am optimistic.

  • David Limacher
    David Limacher I’m tired of trading my time for the privilege of Babylonian money magic.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 22 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn Changes happen, either quickly or slowly. For instance, currency systems form, stabilize, and destabilize.

    Some people (such as myself) become curious at some point about historical trends and forecasting future trends. Since 2002, forecasting changes in prices has been a major investment of my time. On occasion, my forecasts have produced quite large gains in short periods of time. October 23rd was such a time.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 22 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn I do not think that there is anything magical about monetary systems. Governments invent taxes out of thin air and then specify certain kinds of payments that they will accept (to discharge the debts that they invented). If they accept silver coins, then demand temporarily increases in that geographic area for silver. If they accept diamonds, the demand temporarily increases in that geographic area for diamonds. So what?

    Like · Reply · 1 · 22 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn What we also can notice is that from time to time governments may promote demoralization programs to confuse the masses about the simplicity of a public currency system or private currency system. People are programmed to be ashamed of wealth or even of modest ownership of property. The highest goal of a statist is to be dependent completely on the particular governing system and to advocate that the elite that run the governing system will have a total monopoly on economic discretion, redistributing wealth from the middle class to the government elite.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 22 hrs · Edited
  • Ben Belty
    Ben Belty I think of money being magic in the occult sense not the type that is associated with circus acts etc.

    Unlike · Reply · 2 · 21 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn On a related note, I find it notable how so many people who are influenced by mainstream Christian views seem to know so little about commentaries on the scriptures of the Bible made by those Who are fluent in the original languages used in the writing of the Bible.

    Jesus repeated the teachings of Isaiah by saying “in vain they worship me, presenting the traditions of man as the principles of God.” There is a similar passage in regard to the adoration of money being the root of many forms of social disorder. Is money itself the root of social disorder? That is not what the Scriptures say in any language or in any translation.

    A presumptive adoration of money is not innocent curiosity and mindfulness in regard to wealth. A presumptive adoration corresponds to negligence. Negligence can produce a variety of socially unfavorable outcomes.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 21 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn So, beware of negligence. Beware of the negligence of presumptive adoration. There is no substitute for mindfulness and respect. When those are present, then perceptiveness increases. When absent, confusion increases.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn Also, be aware of the negligence of presumptive contempt. There is a reason that governments put so much investment into promoting presumptive contempt among the masses (contempt for each other and for the government). However, that reason is not for the benefit of each and every individual organism within the reach of that government’s system of extortion and coercive influence.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn Ben, you are welcome to expand on your comment. However, I recommend that you read through my comments first (those above and those below).

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn The word occult literally means that one thing has been covered by another thing. The Greek words for “throwing a label across something” are dia-bolos (across-throwing). Those Greek roots make the English words diabolical and devil.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 21 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn Money, however, is not something that has been covered. The system is actually relatively open. There are a variety of psychological warfare programs to confuse reactionary patriots and libertarians and so on, but the reality of all money systems is quite simple and uncontroversial (as to what it is and how it works).

    Like · Reply · 1 · 21 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn The idea that any government is fundamentally a democracy is a clear occultation of the facts. Governments may have democratic processes such as the voting by the members of the jury or schoolchildren voting for the student body president. However, the student body president has strictly limited authority.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn Some Christians will even present strange ideas such as an almighty Deity who is apparently vulnerable and anxious and threatened by some isolated other force besides the Almighty.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn By using the single English word God as the translation for a variety of Jewish words such as Elohim (which is plural) and Hashem (which is singular), there is an occulting of the actual Hebrew Scriptures.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn It is Hashem that was competing against a celestial being with generally similar powers, which we may refer to as a fallen angel or the devil. However, the Elohim created Hashem and the Angels and Titans and ETs and us. When Jesus was challenged by the Pharisees on this point, he scolded them reminding them that their scriptures clearly state “ye are gods.”

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn At a local university, the mascot is a type of devil and the symbol on the side of the football helmets is a trident. That fallen angel who bears a trident in Christianity was known by the name Neptune to the Romans and the name Poseidon to the Greeks.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn Those who lack perceptiveness may think that if I say a type of red and someone else says maroon and someone else says the word for maroon in a few other languages, then we all must be talking about different things because we are using a different word to label.that is precisely the kind of negligence and presumptiveness that Jesus warned about a few thousand years ago when quoting Isaiah, who lived perhaps a few thousand years before him and warned of the same issues.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 21 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn What is a typical method used by this celestial being called Poseidon? That being would stir up a lot of distractions and excitement in order to confuse his foes. If anyone were to research mythology or astrology, you could find frequent references to Neptune as the ruler of confusion.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 21 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn Religions such as the one we know as the United States of America will often use programs to promote confusion amongst the masses. However, The nature of money is not what is being hidden with deceptions usually. They completely neglect to mention that subject although The reality is obvious to anyone who observes the nature of monetary systems.The deceptions are being used to distract people from the otter simplicity of the nature of monetary systems and systems of organized coercion, Also known as governments or crime syndicates.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 21 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn In conclusion, it is a deception when agent provocateurs suggest that monetary systems are magical. School indoctrination rituals and the indoctrination rituals of mainstream media are quite magical and that is so that they can distract us with hysteria about cholesterol or gun control or transgender rights. What do they distract us from? They distract from the basic nature of the coercive system of systematically redistributing wealth.

    Like · Reply · 3 · 21 hrs · Edited
  • Rick Laviolette
    Rick Laviolette I agree. In chess it is a diversion, or a sacrifice with a means to an end. Our debt was created and the money went to private citizens in the world who lend our own money back to us to pay for the debt they created. History repeats.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn Rick, when people say “lend OUR OWN MONEY back to us,” they are repeating propaganda slogans. When a casino “mints” some plastic tokens and then offers them to some people in exchange for working as soldiers of the casino, what does that change about the origin of the token system? When the casino says “whoever resides between these two coastlines (or rivers etc) must pay us property tax in the amount of 100 tokens per year per acre of property,” again that changes nothing about the origin of the system.

    • Rick Laviolette
      Rick Laviolette It must be our money since we, the taxpayers, have to pay it back.

    • Rick Laviolette
      Rick Laviolette That money is secured by US assets and property.

      Unlike · Reply · 1 · 7 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn Being a taxpayer within a particular political jurisdiction is a temporary condition (which individuals and businesses can change by moving from one jurisdiction to another).

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn As for “pay it BACK,” that tends to imply that I received something which I must return. If a governing system invents a crime called “speeding” and then says “anyone caught speeding must serve two years in our navy as a soldier,” then the “debt” thatSee More

      Like · Reply · 1 · 4 hrs · Edited
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn In return, the gangster can offer “protection” against vandalism (specifically, against vandalism by that gangster).

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      Write a reply…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn The “magic” of the deception about money is all linguistic. It is programmed in the public school indoctrination rituals which teach the human resources that “this is YOUR plantation and slaves here get 16% better medical care than in the plantation to the west!”

    Like · Reply · 2 · 9 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn “The plantation system’s casino tokens are YOURS. Also, the holy scriptures of YOUR religion are unlike all other holy scriptures ever before because we used YOUR Ink (24,000 years before you arrived) to make YOUR system.”

    • Rick Laviolette
      Rick Laviolette Do you propose anarchy? I see a political system as effective for peaceful coexistence. Not everyone grabs the brass ring and wants all the gold.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn I propose personal practices of mindfulness, prudence, and wise investment. (I offer a service of managing the private investment accounts of my clients.)

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      Write a reply…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn The idea that the Federal Reserve’s private currency system (and private system of organized coercion and extortion) is “ours” is a very remarkable idea (even “magical”). The reality of how currency systems work is very simple.

    • Rick Laviolette
      Rick Laviolette That is not ours. It was interjected with designer laws to strip our assets.

    • Rick Laviolette
      Rick Laviolette Not much we can do unless we systematically vote them out and new politicians appoint our judges.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn I was not born with legal ownership of anything. Of course governing systems redistribute wealth from the human resources to the government and to the beneficiaries of the government (who in large part are the special interests that form and guide governments).

      Like · Reply · 1 · 4 hrs · Edited
    • Rick Laviolette
      Rick Laviolette I own mine until I miss the taxes or eminent domain is enacted. One reasonably large asteroid will settle the ownership thing.

      Unlike · Reply · 2 · 4 hrs


The August plunge: assessing risks and opportunities in investment markets

October 1, 2015
When we are disappointed with the results produced by the method we have been using, that is when we are most motivated to assess other methods that may be superior. If you are concerned about the future of the US economy and US stock prices, great. Then you are open to safer and more profitable strategies (instead of just “sitting on” any investments that you may now have), right? 
Below, we will take a relaxed look at what to do to at least increase safety. If you can go from uncertainty to confidence, that would be ideal. Otherwise, you can recognize any remaining uncertainty and then reduce exposure to risk (such as by selling positions to “cash them out” in order to avoid larger losses).

For reference, I have repeatedly forecast the recent weakness in US stock prices (and global stock prices). I will show you detail of that below. (If you not understand any of the following or would like for me to repeat any of it to you by phone or skype, then let me know.)

While US stocks were unusually flat most of this year, I profited from other markets. I also profited from the predictable plunge in US stock prices on 8/24.

Lately, I have repeatedly suggested to people that, in particular for any funds that you do not have me manage, I would recommend exiting US stocks to “go to cash.” I have been saying that for well over a year.

Why I said that is because the trend in stocks worldwide and in the US are currently even weaker than in 2007 or 2000 (the risk levels are higher). I can show anyone my publications prior to and during the 2007-2009 stock market decline indicating advance expectation of the beginning of the plunge, the acceleration of the plunge, and the exact timing of the rebound (within a week of the exact low).

Not only did my forecasts allow for avoiding the huge losses during that time, but allowed for enormous gains during the same time. Historic profits were made from large price movements in US bond markets and in commodities as well as from declining prices in US stock prices. Again, I have made easy profits from declining prices in every major market. Almost anyone can do it but most people do not know how it is done.

Next, let’s briefly review my recent forecasts regarding the US stock market. On Jan. 30th, 2015, I published the article which you can read here: https://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/2015/01/30/global-stock-markets-are-at-a-precipice-a-potential-cliff/

The title was rather clear:

Global stock markets are at a “precipice” (a potential cliff)

Here is a short excerpt:

“The last seven months have been quite weak [for the global stock market] relative to most of the last 10 years (shown below). The risk levels in current stock markets globally are currently exceeding the risk levels at the peak in 2007….”

wilshire 5000 decade

Here is an updated chart of that global stock index of the stock prices of 5,000 companies. Note the unusual flatness of early 2015 (the orange section at the top right):

Inline image 2

Even prior to January 2015, I was aware that the trend in global stocks was “maturing” (losing momentum / plateauing). Risks were increasing to such an extreme level that, at the end of last January, I published the alert linked above.

Note the date and highlighted portions of this next email (from August 19, 2015), especially that stocks are “subject to a sudden, massive, and lasting decline.”The subject line of that email is shown below: FYI, US stocks are notably weak again. Click the image to see a larger version.


Inline image 3
Inline image 4
Inline image 5

My predictions were correct. After 8/19/2015, US stock prices began a steep decline. On Saturday 8/22 in an email, I wrote:

“…yesterday’s 3.2% drop was the biggest in [the last 3 years]. For the last few months, I have been writing about the likelihood of such a sharp drop (and what I expect to follow). I did very well from yesterday’s decline in US stocks, but not as well as I had hoped. Fortunately for me, there is much more coming.”

There was an ever bigger plunge in stock prices on Monday 8/24 (starting in Asia when it was still Sunday evening in the US). The next day, I published this report, which shows the actual trading data from the brokerage account:


Reported in that link are the actual investment results (from “day trading” of stock options) on Monday. I made a profit of about $1900 in a few hours off of about $3500 of capital (gains of over 50%).

Throughout early 2015, while many investors were focused on stocks, I was much more conservative and selective. I was measuring risk and focusing on discounts and other unusually-favorable opportunities (in currencies, bonds, commodity markets, etc).
On 8/24, as many stock investors were surprised, I saw exactly what I had been expecting. I took bold, confident action in response to confusion and panic (which I had considered inevitable). I made very sizable gains as others suffered sudden losses of several percent.

I know that trends form, accelerate, then mature. I also know that one type of trend is a “selling panic” which also may slowly form (as a prior trend destabilizes), then suddenly can accelerate, then eventually will re-stabilize.

Market conditions can be unusually “ripe” for a selling panic. I have been interested in learning how to identify that “ripeness” for a panic, then calmly watching for those conditions to develop.

Some selling panics are brief dips, recovering as fast as they happen. However, so far, the rebound after 8/24 has been “modest,” with a few weeks of partial recovery and then more than a week of slowly returning toward the prior low. Each new development is to me just another phase within a larger cycle: trends form, mature, and then de-stabilize.

Are all selling panics brief dips? No, some selling panics begin new trends. Long ago, I got curious about how to distinguish as early as possible between “brief dips” and “long-term reversals of an old trend in to a different trend.” So, I studied markets and I learned.
You can profit from my forecasting competence and my calm confidence. You can begin to do that immediately. If you have further questions (now or later), you are welcome to share them with me.

Releasing Intelligence

September 27, 2015


Have you ever noticed that what people say and what people do may not match? For instance, people may say that they value intelligence, yet seem to be quite terrified of the subject. They may harshly insist that whatever behaviors that they display are the ultimate height of intelligence.
Why are some people so anxious about whether other people agree that they are so intelligent? Why do they invest so much energy in to ridiculing other interpretations for a so-called lack of intelligence? Why do other perspectives trigger so much distress for them? Why are they so desperately anxious for consensus (for silencing alternate opinions… or at least withdrawing from them)?

I can tell you how it was for me when I acted in those ways. I presented a pretense of having crossed a bridge beyond all naivete. My intelligence was perfect, at least according to me.
Why was I so hysterically tense about other people’s perceptions of my intelligence? I did not want them to know that I knew I still had much to learn. I did not want them to know that I was still curious. I did not want them to know that I still wanted to develop my intelligence further.
I pretended to avoid their ridicule and harassment. I abandoned the cultivating of my intelligence in order to display ideas in conformity with what I perceived to be a consensus of opinion.

Where did I get my ideas of consensus? It was the same for me as for anyone else. In addition to several hours every day of mainstream media, I went to schools that programmed the students to set aside their own innate curiosity and then memorize specific content from the curriculum, then blindly repeat it to receive social validation. We even had classes about science in which we memorized and blindly repeated ideas, and then claimed to be certified experts in science.


Did we conduct any experiments? Did we review and thoroughly critique the experiments that other people had conducted?
No, that is not the kind of science we were learning. In most cases, we were learning that memorizing and repeating an unexamined idea was science.
What did we do if someone challenged our competence in science? We hysterically defended our presumptions. We were outraged at their insulting skepticism. In other words, we panicked.
After all, everyone knows that every liver on this planet makes a compound in order to poison the rest of the organism, right? Everyone knows that eating that compound (which everyone makes whether they eat any of it or not) is also deadly, right?

We did not need to review any research on the obvious dangers of cholesterol. We had memorized what we were told and then repeated what we memorized to receive social approval for memorizing and repeating our “science” lessons. Plus, the mainstream media constantly pumped hysteria and paranoia about eating cholesterol, so that must mean that if a chicken egg has a lot of cholesterol, then that is going to explain why all of the chicks that hatch out of chicken eggs are dead, right?
We did not need to look at evidence. We did not need to conduct experiments. We were experts and we had government certifications on the wall to prove it.
My level of intelligence was already rated by the government as “perfect.” Naturally, I did not really know much about the government’s system for rating intelligence, but if they said that my intelligence was perfect (and if I was ashamed about my actual level of intelligence at the time), well then you can understand my panic and distress if anyone questioned the precision of our holy government’s system for rating intelligence. “I do not mind you insulting me,” I would say, “but do not dare insult our holy government!”


To be clear, I was not jealous about the results they were obtaining through their so-called scientific models. I was not jealous because I refused to pay attention to their heretical ideas and would discard any claim that they made because they were making claims that were unfamiliar to me, that were contrary to my holy science lessons, and that must be wrong because my intelligence was already perfect and I had a government certificate to prove it. My anxious panic was not an anxious panic because my anxious panic was passionately defending the honor of our holy government.
Of course, if there ever was an imprecision in the science lessons of our holy government, then that must have been an innocent error. To consider any other alternative would be too shameful, so let’s just move on.

If there is ever any controversy about the precision of an old scientific “consensus,” then we must show our loyalty to the system by campaigning for reforms. We need to reform the educational rituals that program students to memorize and blindly repeat ideas and then call that science. How should we reform those rituals? We will remove a few items from the curriculum and then replace them with new content to memorize and blindly repeat, then call “consensus science.”
Why did I stop pretending to have perfect intelligence? Or, if I did not have a government certificate on the wall, then why did I stop pretending to have less intelligence than the powerful priesthood with government certificates on their wall?
Why I began to stop the pretenses is that eventually I was thoroughly disappointed by the results of the pretense. Of course there was chronic physical tension from hiding my curiosity (blocking the physical expressions that display curiosity, as in “holding my tongue”). But beyond the physical toll of suppressing my physical expression, I just was not getting the prosperity and health and happiness that I desired. Of course, I had pretended that I was getting all of those things for a while, but then I withdrew from those who seemed to lack the emotional stability for me to actually relax my pretenses in their presence without them panicking. I began to relax all of the pretending that I had learned in order to fit in at school and at government jobs.
I was exhausted from all of the pretending. I gave up the façade because it was sabotaging me instead of raising me up through the ranks of the government priesthood.


At first, I resisted the surrender. However, even as I layered new pretenses on top of the old ones, my inner anxiety only increased.

Even though I was a government-certified expert in a few specialties, I had not actually developed a functional amount of competence. I might have loudly proclaimed my competence and confidence, but that was a cover for my shame and lack of confidence.

By then, I knew that I was naïve. I was still terrified, though, if anyone mentioned it.
I knew that humility would be required for me to cultivate curiosity and intelligence. I would need to stop pretending to already know everything.

I knew that courage was required for me to be humble. I would need to start admitting to other people that I do not already know everything. I might even begin to relate to others as having valuable expertise even though their expertise was not the same as mine. I might respect their expertise and their experience.

But that would mean assessing on my own their competence. I would not have the convenient method of simply finding out if they were certified by the holy government as an expert. I would have to accept my own naivete and then select topics that appealed to me, then make my own observations and logically assess the observations made by others.


Yes, I would have to actually develop logic and rational discernment. I would no longer rely on holy consensus by government certification as the only valid standard of credibility and expertise.

Even if an idea was ridiculed in science classrooms or in mainstream media, it might be true. In fact, the more that an idea is threatening to the consensus, it may be that it is more likely to have some truth to it.

I would have to withdraw from passionate debates about which hysterias and heresies were most important to reform (or to protest against or prevent). I would have to decline to enter those debates and even stop actively seeking them out (starting them). It would be quite a change for me!


[In the video, I made an extensive ad lib somewhere around here.]


I could even stop gleefully pointing out the errors of mainstream media and schools. Perhaps, they are systematically biased to focus on certain subjects and not others, plus to focus on those subjects only in certain ways.

I am no longer ashamed of my prior shame. So, I do not need to shame others for whatever I might call shameful.

I respect shame. There is even an intelligence to shame. However, there is an intelligence in absolutely everything.

When I perceive something as a possible threat, I may ridicule it. That might work well for me. If I am jealous of someone and I want to discourage them from competing with me or exposing my shame, then it can be effective to ridicule them or shame them. To protect me from the threat that I perceive, shaming them might work, right?

However, intimidating one possible threat will never resolve the vulnerability to that threat. If I am interested in resolving my vulnerability to the exposure of my naivete or incompetence, the ultimate solution is to develop competence and expertise.


What benefits can we cultivate?

Through my experimentation and research, I found some unfamiliar methods that produced appealing results. I would like to share them with you. Perhaps you will even have some results to share that are even more attractive. Also, for those who simply wish to release their own suppression of their own intelligence, you can benefit from programs that provide exactly what you value most. To continue, click here: results.

How important is mainstream news to you?

September 26, 2015

How do you guys get your news? Do you listen to news TV? Radio? Read online? Newspaper?

Do you think staying on top of news is important or do you think the news is just same shit, different year?

  • Harry Lieberwirth likes this.
  • Comments
    • Harry Lieberwirth

      Harry Lieberwirth I get my news from people that think I care about the news. Someone’s always sharing something. Other than that I don’t actively follow any news outlets. Nor do I actively avoid them for that matter. My response to a lot of things, like news, whatever its nature, is quiet indifference. I’ll start paying attention, when something *actually* starts affecting me or mine. smile emoticon

      Harry Lieberwirth's photo.

      Unlike · Reply · 1 · 2 hrs · Edited
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn

      J R Fibonacci Hunn I check the weather report (current temp, high temp, low temp, chance of rain, any alerts) daily or more. I use my iPhone for that.

    • (Crystallizing Public Opinion was first published in 1923, but a revised edition was published in 1961)

      J R Fibonacci Hunn

      J R Fibonacci Hunn As a longer answer, before I studied massage therapy I got a degree in communications and then went to graduate school to study social psychology. The most memorable quote that I learned as an undergraduate was “we do not control what the masses think, which would be impossible. We control what the masses think about.”

      Like · Reply · 1 · 2 hrs

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn

      J R Fibonacci Hunn That was in a mass media course. In the last week, I have been reading a short book called the Rockefeller files from the mid-70s. It details how john Rockefeller created a monopoly on the oil industry within the US and then spread that monopoly to develop oilfields in Russia, Arabia, etc.

      With that money, he purchased many major newspapers in the US such as the New York Times and Washington Post. He also purchased the ap News wire and many radio stations. The TV industry and the major networks were all started by the same existing media syndicates.

      How did he use all that influence? He used it to direct public attention. By the 1930s during the presidency of FDR, Rockefeller’s agent was the top adviser to the president and lived in the White House full-time. Through the media, The Rockefellers controlled politics. They owned both parties and every candidate for many decades was a member of the Rockefellers CFR. The UN is a Rockefeller project for world government just as the League of Nations before it.

      The Rockefellers started communism in Russia and China with the help of J.P. Morgan. They brought socialism to the US in the 1930s. They started The ecology movement in the early 1970s in order to control competition in the energy industry and drive up oil prices by causing a fuel shortage. The EPA kept out competition and resulted in a dramatic reduction in oil extraction and increased prices. At the start of the decade gasoline in the US was about $.30 a gallon and about $.10 of that went to the Rockefellers and their oil companies. By the end of the decade the price was up to around one dollar andaround $.80 per gallon went to the Rockefellers.

      Like · Reply · 1 hr · Edited

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn

      J R Fibonacci Hunn I could go on and on about that single case. The Rockefellers revolutionized education in the US by dominating all of the colleges that train teachers and then making a monopoly on the textbook industry so that they can control what text books were published and used. They were the ones who sponsored the communist John Dewey in the massive reforms to education in the early 20th century.

      They started the Rockefeller Institute for medical research which is how natural medicine became criminalized and pharmaceutical medicine that attacks the immune system of the patient became standard. What are pharmaceutical drugs made out of? They are petroleum byproducts. They are made from oil and they keep prices of fuel high by redirecting so much petroleum into medicines and alsopesticides of course.

      Like · Reply · 1 hr

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn

      J R Fibonacci Hunn I also studied the writings of Edward Bernays who is the founder of the PR industry. He was hired by the US government to reverse the resistance to the US public of an invasion of Europe in the 1910s. He invented stories which were constantly repeated throughout the media owned by the Rockefellers and other Zionists. His stories might dominate front-page headlines for many weeks and then, a year or decade later, a retraction might be published on page 15.

      His methods work so well that they became standard not only for the US government and other governments, but he was hired by lucky strike cigarettes to promote cigarettes to women. Cigarettes were presented as having medicinal value and contributing to health kind of like vaccines today. Also, Bernays created a kind of feminist revolution as the emotional context of the “great act of anti-sexist rebellion” that he programmed women to take (the smoking of cigarettes in public). He also made a point to have cigarette smoking be featured in hundreds of Hollywood productions.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn

      J R Fibonacci Hunn Next he was hired by the diamond cartel Debeers. His plan with them was also incredibly successful. Diamond rings went from a small marketshare to being the standard for engagement rings.

      How did he do it? He used 90 minute commercials called romance movies. The entire script was centered around an emotional climax when the handsome leading man would present the leading actress with a diamond ring and ask her to marry him. She would say yes and audiences would cheer and demand for diamond rings Would soar. The same rings that could be sold for $20 in one decade would be selling for 200 or 2000 within a few decades.

      Like · Reply · 1 hr · Edited

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci HunnI also follow certain investment market activity very closely (real-time streaming data). However, I pay very little attention to the news about investment markets because the news is just part of the system to manipulate prices in particular directions at selected times.
      • Nicky Curran-Farahvar
        Nicky Curran-Farahvar Where did you study social psychology?
      • J R Fibonacci Hunn
        J R Fibonacci Hunn Florida State University in Tallahassee. I went to Univ. Central Florida in Orlando for my BA.
        Like · Reply · 1 · 29 mins
      • Nicky Curran-Farahvar
        Nicky Curran-Farahvar Ahh. I studied MS human development in Rochester, then did 2 years on PhD at Illinois in Ed Psych, but left my program bc my adviser was intolerable.
      • J R Fibonacci Hunn

        J R Fibonacci Hunn Honestly, I can remember learning relatively little in class that was interesting or practical.

        I did have an elective as an undergrad in which I learned about how the US and UK used Soviet propaganda to demonize the Nazis and blame the Nazis for atrocities committed by the Soviets. Most of that class was unmemorable, but that incident was very explicit and clear and unexpected.

      • J R Fibonacci Hunn
        J R Fibonacci Hunn I dropped out of grad school as well.
        Like · Reply · 1 · 27 mins
      • Nicky Curran-Farahvar
        Nicky Curran-Farahvar Not worth it.
      • Nicky Curran-Farahvar
        Nicky Curran-Farahvar Then my adviser suddenly died, so maybe I should have stuck it out. But my fellow PhD student had been with my adviser 7 years and my adviser was NEVER going to let him graduate. So I thought the future didn’t look auspicious. Now I just teach yoga at the Y.
      • J R Fibonacci Hunn

        J R Fibonacci Hunn In grad school, I saw the film “manufacturing consent” by Noam Chomsky, which was well-done. Chomsky basically “just scratched the surface” without getting in to the actual history (as far as I recall).

        On my own, I eventually learned about how the Federal Reserve was created and the influence of Colonel House as the individual who controlled President Woodrow Wilson. I actually studied the Fed from the perspective of astrological “signatures.” I read one report on the actual sequence of events in the formation of the Fed (by an astrologer who was commenting on the specific timing of different things). The timing and the astrological analysis was moderately interesting, but the actual historical sequence was fascinating.

        The sinking of the Titanic was a strategic move in which hundreds of opponents of the Fed were given free tickets for a wildly-celebrated “privilege,” then it was intentionally sunk, killing the opponents and paving the way for an easy revolution. All sorts of conspiracies have been incredibly successful.

      • Nicky Curran-Farahvar
        Nicky Curran-Farahvar I have a friend who is into Flat earth conspiracy.
      • Nicky Curran-Farahvar
        Nicky Curran-Farahvar I love Chomsky on politics… Not so crazy about the LAD in linguistics.
      • J R Fibonacci Hunn

        J R Fibonacci Hunn In my youth, the only conspiracy that was familiar to me was probably the use of the Trojan Horse to deceive the Trojans (and slaughter them), ending that war in favor of the Greeks. Later, I read “war is a racket” by USMC Major General Smedley Butler.


      • J R Fibonacci Hunn

        J R Fibonacci Hunn Chomsky seems to be condemning propaganda. Butler also seemed to be troubled by guilt (unless that was just part of his act).

        Bernays did not write with any apologies. He just detailed exactly how he used deception and even intimidation to profit his clients.

        Like · Reply · 2 · 14 mins

        • J R Fibonacci Hunn

          J R Fibonacci Hunn On the History channel, my wife was just watching something on how the ruthless pirate Captain Morgan was accused of piracy by the British crown and then made in to the Vice Governor of Jamaica. I do not know if JP Morgan is a descendant, but that would make sense.

          Maybe in 2007 or so, I read a book on how the european monarchies hired pirates and called them “privateers,” giving them licenses to attack the ships of opposing european powers and then the pirates (“privateers”) and monarchs would split the plunder.

          I also read a biography about the founder of Time-Life, Henry Luce, whose family was also deep in to US politics and he grew up in a family of zealous Christian missionaries in China.

          Like · Reply · 1 · 7 mins
        • J R Fibonacci Hunn

          J R Fibonacci Hunn

          In the “fed” article, you can ignore the first few paragraphs about astrology.

          Start reading from here:

          The Fed’s Origin

          On the evening of November 22, 1910, a group of distinguished men met at a railway station in New Jersey to board a private train for Jekyll Island, Georgia. The group included Senator Nelson Aldrich, the presidents and senior partners of the largest New York banking and financial houses, a German banker named Paul Warburg, and J.P. Morgan’s personal assistant, Benjamin Strong. So secret was the journey, that the travelers addressed each other by first name only, and Jekyll Island’s regular staff of servants was sent on holiday lest the exclusive gathering attract attention. Jekyll Island was owned as a private sporting lodge and retreat by some of the country’s most influential industrialists and financiers. At the time, the members estimated that they controlled one-sixth of the world’s wealth (membership by inheritance only).

          Why did the group seek such a remote location to formulate a new monetary bill for the country? The reason lies in the events surrounding the Panic of 1907. Demand for monetary reform soared following the Panic. The average citizen was very opposed to …”

          Like · Reply · 1 · 5 mins
        • Nicky Curran-Farahvar
          Interesting but too hard to understand. I need the For Dummies version of most things.
        • J R Fibonacci Hunn
          The short version is that the Federal Reserve is a private bank created to profit the wealthy at the expense of the average US taxpayer. The Fed not only brought about an end to the US government’s issuance and control of their government currency (“US notes”), but made their private currency a global currency through the bully of the US military-industrial-complex, especially the second US invasion of Europe (“World War 2”).
        • J R Fibonacci Hunn
          I will post a set of images of the old US government currency next. Note the words “silver dollar” at the bottom and the words UNITED STATES OF AMERICA at the top.

      Now a comparison to the Fed’s currency:

      The top coupon was redeemable for an actual ounce of silver (a “Dollar”). The bottom coupon is “non-redeemable.” There is nothing backing the currency except for the military power of the US government (which is basically the agent /collection agency of the private Federal Reserve Bank).

      Here is another private currency issued by the Asian bank, HSBC:

      • J R Fibonacci Hunn

        J R Fibonacci Hunn Between 1913 and the 1933 revolution in which the Fed basically took over the US Treasury, there were these private bank notes that clearly say (across the top) that they are NATIONAL CURRENCY that is “secured” (backed up) by deposits of US government bonds (a debt obligation owed to their private bank by the US government as in the US taxpayers):

      • J R Fibonacci Hunn Each of the 12 regional Fed banks would issue their own notes.

      • J R Fibonacci Hunn

        J R Fibonacci Hunn As for news, I am moderately interested in the companies that create the news as part of their commercial operations. The actual content of the news promotes their interests, not mine. I am only very rarely interested in most of the news content that they publicize.

        I use the internet to research health and science, plus to correct the indoctrinated presumptions about science that I was fed in mainstream schools and through mainstream news and even through “the alternative press.” I used to go to astrology websites frequently to learn about the news that was going to be happening before it happened.

        I am more interested in studying trends, including the way that cultural trends are intentionally directed by special interest groups. I mean the Rockefellers and their agents in private foundations, plus the KGB, CIA, Mossad etc.

      • J R Fibonacci Hunn

        J R Fibonacci Hunn This is a 5 minute video from 1984 which I saw maybe 10 years ago for the first time. This “ex” KGB agent (who had fled to Canada and lived there) details his own activities and the overall plan:


      • J R Fibonacci Hunn

        This much more recent video is from a KGB-run TV station based in New York City. The featured author is a former participant in the activities of intimidation and assassination by private corporations.

        Why is he (and Yuri above) allowed to live while making such explicit statements? Because these “whistle-blowers” serve a valuable purpose to the interest of the leading imperialists.


        • J R Fibonacci Hunn

          J R Fibonacci Hunn

          back to the Fed article:

          The Congressional Record was filled the remarks of Congressman Louis T. McFadden, Speaker of the House. He spoke against the Fed, exposing it, “Some people think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States government institutions. They are not government institutions. They are private monopolies.”

          He was fired upon while exiting a cab in the Capitol. He then became very ill after food at a Washington banquet….

          His protests ended on October 3,1936 because of “sudden death by heart failure.”

        • J R Fibonacci Hunn

          J R Fibonacci Hunn

          The Committee on Banking Currency, and Housing (of the House of Representatives, 94th Congress, second session, August 1976) issued the following report titled


          The report concluded: “In summary, the Federal Reserve directors are apparently representative of a small group which dominates much of the economic life of this nation.”

on popular methods of coping with social pressure

September 25, 2015

Here is part of a public facebook thread. I presented some comments that I think are worth archiving, so here is the record:

If we are going to hate pot, we might as well hate caffeine, and alcohol which are legal but do more damage than pot. And why not throw sugar in the pot (no pun intended). And GMOs too. And fluoride that’s in our water and toothpaste which makes sheeple out of people. Some drugs, like caffeine,flouride and antidepressants and ritalin serve the powers that be to keep the masses enslaved in jobs and educations they hate, that don’t serve a man’s spirit but keep him in line. There are other drugs that do not harm the body but EXPAND CONSCIOUSNESS and destroy the Dominator culture we live in

Humans of New York's photo.

“I hate pot. I hate it even more than hard drugs. I’ve taught high school for 25 years and I hate what marijuana does to my students. It goes beyond missing homework assignments. My students become less curious when they start smoking pot. I’ve seen it time and time again. People say pot makes you more creative, but from what I’ve seen, it narrows my students’ minds until they only reference the world in relation to the drug. They’ll say things like: “I went to the beach and got so high,” or “I went to a concert and got so high.” They start choosing their friends based on the drug. I hate when people say that it’s just experimenting. Because from what I’ve seen, it’s when my students stop experimenting.”

  •  6 people liked this
    • Steve Skouson
      Steve Skouson Carl, I was with you, until you opened up your mouth, and showed your ignorance.

      Ritalin is a STIMULANT, just like caffeine and amphetamine.

      How are you going to “drug a child into submission” with Ritalin? It’s like putting out a fire with gasoline!




  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn All societies condition the organisms within it (including in bee hives etc). In fact, all social interaction conditions the participants.

    Mainstream schools program students to memorize and repeat whatever they are told. In other words, natural curiosity and intelligence are redirected (compromised). Many Science classes program the students with ideas about science (rather than promote actual scientific investigation and discovery). When students learn ideas about cholesterol and then are socially rewarded for blindly repeating those ideas, they tend to form prejudices in favor of whatever ideas have been promoted to them and reinforced socially. That is basically the opposite of scientific inquiry.

    Then, when confronted with simple observations about the manufacturing of cholesterol by the livers of so many species, the hysteria of the mainstream student says hilarious things like “eating cholesterol is bad.” However, it is not a toxin. It is a nutrient so essential that we make lots of it and then convert it in to things like testosterone, estrogen, and Vitamin D.

    Those points are not in controversy. However, science indoctrination rituals in mainstream classrooms tend to result in hysterical attachment to the curriculum. When faced with actual science, former students sincerely may think that they already know (because of the social programming about science). Their curiosity has been stifled along with their intelligence. They are ashamed of the idea that a presumption they hold may be imprecise or completely inaccurate. So they throw tantrums.

    Confronted with these comments about the predictable results of “science classroom instruction,” some hysterically cry for reform. However, just as classrooms are not democratic, neither is the education system. Most Parents do not have the political influence to create lasting reform. In other words, they do not have the money or the connections to counter the Rockefellers and similar rich donors.

    schools promote obedience to the government and the generation of future tax revenues for the government. Students leave school expecting consensus in the rest of life and so they tend to be so unstable emotionally that when confronted with a variety of opinions about most any subject, they panic and then argue for the familiar.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 21 hrs
    • Justin Dunaway Lmt
      Justin Dunaway Lmt Is your degree in psychology or in brain chemistry?
    • Carl Freestone
      Carl Freestone wrote J R’s credentials go beyond what any university can bestow. He is truly a genius in a class of his own!
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn To Justin (the LMT), among my training and educational background is… A certificate in massage therapy!

      If someone understands the basics of physics as it relates to brain chemistry, that can simplify lots of issues. When people talk about pain or inflammation, they are talking about basic issues of physics. Many MDs seem not to understand the simplicity of how to stop producing inflammation and pain, so they focus on interfering with the nerve signals and “numbing” the brain with anesthetic intoxication. Temporary relief can lead to profitable addictions.

      My university training also involved lots of classes about social psychology, but I was a rather confused young fellow when I left graduate school. My first encounter with the Department of Justice (working for them) destroyed quite a few illusions that I had “adopted” in schools.

      Like · Reply · 18 hrs · Edited..
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn

    There can be a huge competition for social validation, including the demeaning of others. When Steve Skousen focused on the single issue of Ritalin and in such a remarkable way, that was competitive. When Ramona shamed him by basically insulting his church, that was also competitive.

    How much of the rest of the thread is “a competition for validation?” How much of my comments here are competitive?

    I do not mind the specifics. If we are casual in our “competitiveness,” then we can observe who is competing against us and who is competing along with us (in collaboration).

    Like · Reply · 2 · 21 hrs · Edited
    • Ramona Kleespies
      Ramona Kleespies I would say much of your commentary is competitive. I don’t mind it at all however because I don’t make it wrong. It’s your point of view. If it works for you and you are enlivened and excited about your life, go for it.
      Unlike · Reply · 1 · 19 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn When I am present to the choice to label something “competitive” or “shameful,” then that, I assert is the absence of hysteria. In fact, I can relate to a specific “pattern of behavior” as hysterical or not.

      From aliveness (even AS aliveness), is there any issue of “enlivening my life?” Nope. Some form addictions to excitement as a coping mechanism to distract themselves from shame. I might have even done that myself. Maybe I was even attached to “enlivening” other people.

      Hysteria can be very popular, and yet still be entirely hysterical. What cannot be typical is “above average results.” Typical results are always average, never above average.

      Like · Reply · 1 · 18 hrs · Edited
    • Ramona Kleespies
      Ramona Kleespies Oh for heavensake. Stop headiness and just BE! smile emoticon
      Unlike · Reply · 1 · 17 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn Being is independent of “competing to be the least heady.” There is validation, invalidation, hysteria, self-awareness, and a variety of other things. All of them are like branches on the tree of being.

      One branch is even labeled “non-being.” To some that is hysterical. To others it is hilarious.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      Write a reply…
  • Ramona Kleespies
    Ramona Kleespies Everything is made up. Most any scientist will tell you there is no such thing as objectivity. So nothing of the past is truly applicable to the now. No paradigm, structure, history, media or classroom. Mentioning of such is living in the past. My mentioning of Mr Skouson was tongue in cheek. smile emoticon
  • Steve Skouson
    Steve Skouson After the language you directed at me, you’re sending a G.B. Hinckley quote?


  • Steve Skouson
    Steve Skouson

    What, Collin, no more insipid comments?

    You don’t want me to play with you like a half broken Atari?

    Igor, please bring in my favorite DumbToy, Collin!

    Collin, I can play you like a cheap video game, but YOU’RE easier. (Don’t your boyfriends say that, too?)

    Oh, you SIMPLE little boy! Like he said in A Few Good men, you picked the wrong Marine to F with.

    I could break you, without breaking a sweat!

    But, you’re not playing anymore.

    To the rest of you, I was called, in posts that have since been deleted (for, I’m assuming, the FOUL language used) less than an amoeba, by one of Carl’s “children.”

    I responded. But, since the initial posts have been erased, Collin (Carl’s “child”) looks like an angel here, and I look like Satan’s main helper.

    I was chastised, by someone who couldn’t spell “O,” but his verbal sewage is no longer here.

    Hope you understand, and can we get back to a “rational” discussion? (It may be irrational, because I like dividing by zero!)


  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn Steve mentioned the topic of “a rational discussion.” Carl started by listing some things he hates (irrationally?) and quoting a teacher who complained about the use of marijuana by students in order to inhibit the curiosity of students, which affects his job performance and job satisfaction.

    All of it has made sense to me. As for a rational discussion, there must first be some common interest. Otherwise, it can just be a bunch of reactions going off like popcorn popping… plus with the emotion of one POP triggering more POPS.

    Maybe there is a group of people, even within a family or household, that have all been repressing their emotions of frustration because of their social situation. The people might all be interested in the subject of frustration, whether or not any one of them recognizes that. So, once they start talking, that can start a cascade of frustrated complaints (kind of like in a flock of birds that are on the ground and when a few birds start to fly away in distress, then the whole pack panics and flies away).

    However, the people may not actually disperse. They may just keep throwing around their favorite complaints at each other, then complain about other people who are not validating their complaint. “Other people are complaining about something else, so they are frustrating me even more!!!”

    All the people may have already been frustrated. The complaint that “they are frustrating me EVEN MORE” implies pre-existing frustration, right?

    Like · Reply · 1 · 5 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn So,when someone experiences frustration (me, Carl, Steve, the teacher who hates pot, etc), what does that frustration signal? It signals an unfulfilled desire.

    We could call the frustration an “upset.” The terminology is not important to me.

    So, when there is an unfulfilled desire, the frustrated person may not even be attentive to what the desire is that is unfulfilled. They may be ashamed of that desire and pretend that the frustrated desire is not that shameful one, but some other one that is socially encouraged. Some desires are shamed socially. Some are encouraged.

    The reality is that having a frustrated desire is essentially the same as having an unfulfilled desire. Has it been fulfilled? Not yet. Will it be? Maybe.

    With frustration, we might presume that there may be some social resistance to admitting to or pursuing the desire. Should every desire be welcomed or encouraged? Should certain desires be repressed (or should certain methods of pursuing a desire be regulated or punished)?

    Desires (or “motivations”) are just what they are. Social conditioning about desire is just what it is.

    When the desire of a powerful group (or institution) is to direct and regulate the desires of the local youth, then curriculum gets created for redirecting the natural motivations of the youth. Obedience gets promoted. Some institutions want to create loyal taxpayers who are generally dependent on the governing institutions (UN, NATO, EU, USSR, USA, etc).

    Natural curiosity may get funneled in to specific approved subjects. Kids may get bored. Some may smoke pot or drink alcohol or find some other coping mechanism to endure their boredom during the educational rituals that they are forced to attend.

    Teachers complain about the kids who are smoking pot. Carl complains about the teacher. Steve complains about Carl. Ramona complains about Steve. I complain about Ramona.

    Popcorn pops. Marijuana plants grow.

    Flocks of bird land and then start looking for worms to eat. If a few fly off all at once, the whole flock is likely to burst in to the air. Eventually, they may all come back to the ground to search for more worms.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 5 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn When one is alert and perceives clearly, everything is just however it is. When one is internally agitated, there will be an endless series of external triggers for displays of agitation. When one is anxious (easily disturbed), there will be triggers for panics of outrage “everywhere.”

    (Paraphrased from Titus 1:15)

    Like · Reply · 1 · 4 hrs · Edited
  • Dan Burger
    Dan Burger I can’t decide who is “RIGHT” yet, isn’t that what is important? wink emoticon
    Unlike · Reply · 2 · 2 hrs · Edited
  • Carl Freestone
    Carl Freestone Good point
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn When people are so easily “socially agitated” that the absence of consensus in a group results in a panic of tossing invalidations (and other adult tantrums), that could be because the agitated people are expecting to be targeted, harassed, and bullied. Why? Why are they so defensive / passive aggressive?

    Maybe because we all value privacy and safety. Maybe we do not want to be crammed up in a classroom with a bunch of other kids / people. Maybe it is too much stimulation. So, we may try to focus in on “the assignment” as an escape from all the social stimulation.

    why do people attack each other’s ideas so ferociously? Because when people are crammed together too densely, they want to push each other away. Any excuse to push someone will do. If someone states a “stupid” idea, then the harassment and bullying begins. Any justification for targeting someone can be invented.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn
    J R Fibonacci Hunn When we are targeted with social pressure about how we should be and how we should not be, we may desire to retreat from that pressure. We may construct a theatrical justification to retreat.

    We want time to relax. We want time to process all that emotional stimulation from social pressure. However, if we retreat to a household where there is “no space” for decompressing, then one way to retreat socially without retreating physically is the use of substances that numb us out.

    We may say “I like the numbness.” Perhaps we dislike the social pressures and are escaping them through self-medication or other coping mechanisms.

    What happens when someone is suddenly in a natural disaster (rodeo-chediski wildfire) and they do not have their favorite legal or illegal drugs (Xanax, panax, etc)? In some cases, they are fine. The normal social competition is absent, so they do not need to escape from it.

    What happens if they go on vacation by them self for a week to a remote place? Again, they may lose interest in numbing out. The social pressure and social competition is absent, so they have no attraction to escapism.

On epidemics of “knee-jerk” reactivity

September 21, 2015

RQR wrote: I believe it was Churchill that said something like, “A five-minute conversation with the average voter is enough to convince you of why democracy is one of the worst forms of government.”

But he added, “it’s still better than all the others”.
Anyway, I’m amazed that people who have no responsibility for outcomes, no authority, and no details that are critical to decisions are so eager to pontificate on the rightness or wrongness of those that are at the center of the action.


JR replied:
There is an epidemic of paranoia relating to consensus. People may be so emotionally challenged by the existence of a variety of perspectives that they display surprise at the existence of perspectives other than their own. There is a distress in the background, right?

“How can infants be so ignorant? How can the people who have been programmed by public schools and mainstream media be so loyal to the ideas that they have been trained to memorize and then repeat in exchange for social rewards? How can the average voter be so distressed that they react in outrage and hysteria when confronted with the reality that there is a diversity of opinions?”

People tend to want to be liked. We may want to be perceived as “experts on everything.” We are “wired” through schooling rituals to be adapted to the social context of school: we crave the familiar validation of the government authority who will maintain consensus through their “near absolute concentration” of social power.

So, when I go in to science class, how do I relate to what the teacher says? “You all need to be attentive to the scientific fact that every liver on this planet makes a dangerous substance in order to harm the rest of the organism (specifically, by converting it in to things like estrogen, testosterone, and Vitamin D). Also, you will die if you eat that substance which you also manufacture constantly. So, we will now use a single specific test to see if your levels of that substance in your blood are so high that we need to attack your liver to impair it’s ability to manufacture the demon which has been possessing you (called cholesterol).”

The typical student thinks that they are now an expert on cholesterol. They think that they are an expert on science.

They are in a class called “science class” and they repeat some mainstream quackery on a “science test” in order to get social approval from the teacher. So, they really think yes they actually think that they are an expert.

Is it amazing? Absolutely. The profits that are collected through creating demand for statin medications is also amazing. Anticipating that profit, the manufacturers hired some researchers and lobbyists to alter the curriculum of schools and create a hysteria about cholesterol, then presented their “one and only solution.”

The teachers (who also may think that they are experts on science) present cholesterol as a toxin. What if cholesterol is part of the body’s healing response to repair damaged tissue? Well that simply cannot be true because that would mean that what schools programmed me to believe might be slightly inaccurate!

When the windshield wipers turn on in my car, does that cause it to rain? Correlation does not prove causality, right?

Well what if there is a $200 million budget? In that case then the correlation between movement in windshield wipers and rainfall is labeled as “absolute proof” that the wiping is not a response to the rainfall and no further research is needed because the government experts all agree with their corporate sponsors.


RQR responded:
JR, it’s a type of laziness and the ease of knee-jerk reactions. In order to get closer to the truth, one has to do the work of thinking.


“It” is distress. In order to get closer to the truth, one might need the physiological and social conditions to discover it. By the way, can you guess what happens to the brain’s capacity for logic and learning when the levels of certain nutrients (such as cholesterol) are “too low?”

On the programming of political antagonisms and hysterias

September 19, 2015

I am going to share a series of interactions that share a single theme. First, I will start at the end. I will share my own post that Carl recently shared and asked me about. The background was a set of interactions involving a fellow with the initials TD, whom I find generally quite intelligent and open (but with some exceptions).  I will share the background last. I plan to remove all other names except for the 3 participants already noted (including me, JR).

Carl Freestone shared your post.

12 hrs ·

VP Andrew Johnson: “anyone who questions my political values is irrational and arrogant.”

President Abraham Lincoln: “and what exactly are your political values?”

The VP: “your question only proves that you are irrational and arrogant, so that justifies completely ignoring your question. I have been mad all day long and just waiting until I could bait someone in to volunteering to be the target of my contempt. Thank you!”

The President: “very interesting.
By the way, if someone ever assassinates me with the help of several accomplices, automatically making you the new President, would you then use your presidential powers to pardon them, protecting them from criminal prosecution?”

VP: “Hey, I did not make up these rules. I just use them in the advancement of my political values.”

  • You like this.

Carl wrote:

I’m not getting the VPs logic, J R. Is this what it looks like when one is irresponsible?

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Carl, first, this begins as a fictionalized version of a real Facebook exchange today (then I got a little more creative). Second, I can understand your labeling of “irresponsible.” Third, I call it “what you get when someone has been subjected to years of mainstream education.” I will explain that.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn When a government wants to program certain political values in the youth, it can create curriculum standards and then train the youth to first focus on memorizing the political ideals and then second to blindly repeat those slogans back on school tests in order to attract social validation. Since “there is only right answer” that gets credit from the teacher, the students become accustomed to the idea of consensus. They actually expect all other people to agree with their ideals. They may be confused by exposure to any contrasting political ideal. so, with that programming as a foundation, the youth graduate from school and suddenly there is no social ritual to confine their intellects. So, to adjust to their distress (from the absence of someone telling them the one and only right way to think), they turn to religion and the media. From the media, they are given basically one of two approved ideologies.

    In the US, we have the social nationalists (the republicans, who are nationalists with a heavy dose of socialism). We also have the national socialists (the democrats, who are socialists with a heavy dose of nationalism).

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Most of that is not essential to the psychology of it all. The main issue is that when people are ashamed of all the socialism, then they become republicans. When they are ashamed of all the nationalism (the imperialism and corporate welfare), they become democrats.in contrast to nAtionaLism would be a confederacy. That is when the private citizens and the sTates retain power rather than the nation (presenting itself as the savior of all of the states / citizens).

    because of the shame about the basic foundation of the U.S. As a national socialist republic (not a democracy!), there is a background of paranoia and anxiety. People want to distract themselves from whatever is shameful to them.

    so, they Pick something to condemn. The fans of socialist Bernie sanders may hysterically ridicule those who note that socialism and communism are similar in several ways.

    “They are irrational! It is offensive that they do not agree with us. Our group has a monopoly on intelligence. How can all of those other people be so irrational? I do not understand it and so in my own hysteria I ridicule them for confronting me with the reality that there are a variety of political preferences. The existence of variety disturbs me. I need consensus like in the 6th grade class in which the teacher provided the official truth and then regulated us by censoring any controversy (or only on approved issues, like abortion -either pro-abortion or anti-abortion).”

    the hysteria is epidemic. Plus, it is programmed.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn By the way, president Johnson did pardon “the assassination team” hired by the British monarch to over rule the ballots of U.S. voters with a bullet to the head of Lincoln.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn TD, feel free to review and comment.

Here is the specific exchange on facebook that led to the above content (and I put some portions in bold or italics):

Please win, Please win, Please win

The People For Bernie Sanders 2016's photo.

This is happening, people. Bernie Sanders to grace cover of Time Magazine TIME

  • “KRB”: I like Bernie, but Americans will NEVER elect a self described socialist. It won’t happen.
    • TD: canada [where I live] is socialist. so are all the other best places to live like scandinavian countries.. i think people need to read and figure out what it actually means
      Like · Reply · 4 · 19 hrs
    •  socialism puts checks and bounds on greed and gives you awesome social perks like free healthcare…bummer
      Like · Reply · 1 · 19 hrs
    •  i need to see a doctor, i just walk right in.
    •  oops forgot my wallet…no biggie

      Like · Reply · 2 · 19 hrs

    • KRB: I agree, and if I thought he had a chance I’d vote for him. But sadly, most Americans still link socialism to Cold War communism. Is it rational? No way!…Americans just can’t separate the two. We are not that progressive. It’s sad.
    •  TD: it’s weird..for such a powerful country it’s so strongly backward. I think a lot of other western countries are watching and just shaking their head going ” what the hell is going on there? ” That Trump can even run for president makes the whole thing look like a bad joke…I feel bad for all the good american people, it’s embarrassing.
      Like · Reply · 2 · 19 hrs
    • KRB: I totally agree, TD.
    • TD: For a country that used to be so progressive it’s a shame

      Like · Reply · 19 hrs

      KRB: You don’t have to sell me on it. I’d be fine with following the European model. I’m just saying America will never be socialist country. At least not in my lifetime. The GOP and moderate Dems won’t vote for it.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn KRB, if you talk with Eastern Europeans who fled the soviet bloc to come to a LESS socialist System in the U.S., then you might have a different perspective. If you ridicule someone whose opinion differs from yours, that justifies avoiding the details of their opinion.

      if you want to know what the KGB had to say about the connection between socialism and communism, search “yuri KGB demoralization and destabilization.” Of course, I expect you to ignore or ridicule the idea of researching the issue. If you think that you already know, then why open a closed mind?

      Like · Reply · 15 hrs

    • “SN:” Socialism and Communism are two different systems, no matter what the KGB had to say about it. Pol Pot and Mao cannot be compared to any socialist leader like Bernie Sanders by anyone with a bit of good sense.

      Like · Reply · 15 hrs

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn FYI, the socialist agenda has been advancing consistently in the U.S. Since at least the 1930s. Do you know the 10 “planks” of Karl Marx’s Communist manifesto? How many are in place in the U.S.? 10 out of 10 are in progress.

      Like · Reply · 15 hrs

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn TD, I agree that many Americans are embarrassed about politics. Democrats are embarrassed by trump (a republican). Republicans are embarrassed by Obama (democrat).

      Why are the masses demoralized by the *opposing* party’s candidates? Because of the great success of the subversion programs to demoralize and divide the population in the U.S.

      Like · Reply · 1 · 15 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn SN, I note that you consider yourself an expert on the issue and do not need to consult the KGB. For those in distress, there is always a “strawman” to attack or a red herring to use to distract yourself from the trigger of terror and shame.
    • SNJ R Fibonacci Hunn, no, I don’t have to consult the KGB in order to discern between Socialism and Communism. That doesn’t make an expert, it’s enough to do some research. Or you want to keep pushing your theory that the USSR and Sweden are basically the same?
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn (To SN:) That is what I mean by “a strawman.” You attack an assertion that I did not make. I am used to that. I consider it hysteria.

    TD experiences shame [& embarrassment] about political trends in the U.S. That is also common, even for people who are not here.

    shame and hysteria are the desired effects of demoralization. Then the new hope for salvation is the next politician to the rescue, right? If he loses, there is a small instant demoralization. If he wins, then there is euphoria then a much longer period before the shame sets in.

    Like · Reply · 14 hrs

    KRB: To J R… I’m not ridiculing anyone. I think you misunderstood me. I don’t feel that way…. And I don’t think that’s everyone’s opinion, but I have heard that comparison (socialism/communism) made before particularly when I’m around my parents’ friends…baby boomers. I wish the USA was more progressive, and I hope-hope-hope I’m wrong about socialism in America. I’d love a Bernie Sanders for my President. I just don’t think the majority would support it. Peace.
  • KRB: Relax J R,! I’m on your side. No attacking happening from me. If you are in a battle with me, it’s a one way fight.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Last century, What was the big difference between the USSR and USA and the declining empire of Britain? Was it politics? No. It was that the uS and USSR were the #1 and #2 producers of a cool new fuel called “crude oil.” Britain did not have it, so their empire over 25% of the land mass on the planet shrunk considerably, while the soviet and U.S. Empires expanded.
  • TD: J R likes to argue and he loves being right. Thats what I like about him
    Like · Reply · 1 · 14 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn In contrast to (who)???

    Like · Reply · 14 hrs

    J R Fibonacci Hunn I am open to providing actual factual references that might not correspond to people’s slogans.
  • KRB: I’m in mello mode….not in debate mode. Have fun! Peace out! 😎

    Like · Reply · 14 hrs

  •  TD: J R. I personally don’t feel anything, especially shame. You are projecting.. There is no real shame.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I was just paraphrasing you, TD: “For a country that used to be so progressive it’s a shame.”

    a shame for who? Not for me. For you?

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Also, What exactly do you mean by “backwards?” Do you mean it scares you? Causes you grief? Infuriates you?

    grin emoticon

  •  TD:  it’s just wording, not literal.. don’t be so willing to always be right you sound arrogant…sorry..
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn If something disturbs you and you keep focusing on it, that is not unusual. “It is sad.”

    No, a human is sad about it. It is what it is.

    Like · Reply · 14 hrs

  • TD: holy shit man, go and do your linguistic tearing apart to someone else..Do you listen to yourself some times? I appreciate your intellect but sometimes you come off a bit self righteous buddy..
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Many people are demoralized. If “that sounds arrogant,” Then maybe “arrogance” is your go-to justification for coping with something that challenges you in a way that exceeded your commitment to the subject.
    Like · Reply · 1 · 14 hrs
  • TD: it was a pretty simple Meme. I don’t need to argue this one at all.. Got to pick my battles.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn So you appreciate my intellect except when your self-righteousness and my self-righteousness distract you? Show me self-righteousness. Show me arrogance.
    I model it like this, as an example: “I am so glad that our country is not shameful like yours.” I do not mind people criticizing the U.S.

    Almost everyone wants social validation. They want to preserve what they already believe. So be it.

  • TD: it’s all good buddy, take a bit of criticism, it’s healthy.. I take shit all the time. it’s no that big of deal.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn You did not say anything that offended me. You just informed me about you. You can see my latest status for my further comment relating to this thread (the quotations of Abe Lincoln and Andrew Johnson).
  • TD:  i am all good
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Somewhere in the U.S. there are a bunch of republicans praising their favorite candidate for being 6 parts nationalist to 4 parts socialist. Their Facebook thread looks exactly like this one, except here Bernie is praised for being 6 parts socialist to his 4 parts of nationalism.
  • TD:  lol.. thats actually pretty funny
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Sad, funny, infuriating, boring: it all depends on what emotions are just bubbling under the surface for whoever is observing. You got all the way down to the humor layer. tongue emoticon
    Like · Reply · 1 · 13 hrs
  • TD: lol
    Unlike · Reply · 1 · 11 hrs
  • SC: It seems that America and it’s comrades are imploding and their society is collapsing. Well, sorry for the ordinary american people but you can’t go around the world buggering up other innocent peoples lives all the time and expect that something good will come out of it all for your country. All you do is create more hardship for your own. If America stopped going to the planets and having space cadets and making weapons of mass destruction then they would have more than enough money to wipe out their debt.! But they won’t because the war mongers that run it would lose out.!
  • Like · Reply · 14 hrs

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn I laugh when I read that “America is collapsing” (written by SC). Really? That is funny.

      I had a girlfriend who lived through the “collapse” of Yugoslavia in to the different countries that now cover that portion of the globe (Serbia, Croatia, etc). There was a civil war. There was an actual collapse of social infrastructure.

      (By the way, some of the immigrants to the US that I mentioned earlier in this thread were from that part of Eastern Europe and are relatives of that ex-girlfriend of mine. They lived under communism and they have “very strong opinions” about socialism and candidates like Bernie Sanders.)

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn When we look at empires, like the British empire (or the Spanish empire, Soviet empire etc), we see that, although it is much contracted from 100 years ago, it still rules over Canada and many other regions. Does the British monarchy continue to benefit from going “around the world buggering up other innocent peoples?” Yes, even though they have not been invading new areas like India and Hong Kong recently. They reap the benefits today of military expansions from hundreds of years ago.

    Some other related content from TD’s facebook wall:

    TD shared John Stevens‘s photo.

    20 hrs ·

    John Stevens's photo.

    John StevenstoPhilosophy

    Bernie Sanders and economics.

    If someone says “Bernie doesn’t understand economics.”
    Ask them if they are Austrian or Keynesian.

    If they say Austrian, which they probably will, tell them they are being intellectually dishonest.
    Austrians consider economics to be based on certain value judgements.
    So when those people say that Bernie “doesn’t understand” they are really saying that they don’t agree with Bernie’s values.

    Manufacturing Consent

    • JR and 6 others  like this.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I think it is stupid to focus “too much” on what you say you are against. It is like having a campaign to prevent people from thinking about a pink elephant that has some painted shapes on the side of the elephant’s torso and the shapes form the letters of these words “this pink elephant (which you should not even be thinking about) hysterically condemns reverse psychology as shameful”.

What matters most? Chasing social validation or forming social nets?

September 14, 2015

What matters more? 

​a) ​What matters most to you…
​b) Or anything else?

Sometimes, people are influenced to focus away from what matters most to them and instead to focus their attention on ​issues that have been selected ​by ​ a particular special interest group. In moderation, it ​might​ be beneficial to individuals for them to focus on ​a few extra ​issues that may give them a long-term advantage eventually. ​Maybe those new issues will matter soon, even if they do not seem to matter much yet.

C​onforming to the interests of a powerful group could ​have a variety of consequences. Conformity could ​be dangerous or beneficial or a mixture of both.Various kinds of non-conformity, especially when openly practiced, can also involve unique risks (or opportunities). We can explore and assess some different alternatives soon.

First, back to the original question, when people organize their lives around what matters most to them, what results are predictable? We could observe that some people seem unusually clear, focused, and committed to producing specific results through their own personal experimentation. They could be extremely interested in precisely measuring the results of the methods that they select. If they do not produce the results that motivate them, then they can openly express their disappointment and then shift right to exploring other methods that might be more effective.

They may seem unusually uninterested in casting blame or justifying themselves. Apparently, they are not focusing on the outcome of other people in general agreeing with their stories or ideas. They will be consistently interested in other people in just two basic ways: which people can most contribute to the selected goal and which people, if any, can most interfere with their own production of satisfactory results?

In contrast, have you ever noticed an instance of people who seem to be competing with each other for social validation? Maybe they argue intensely over an issue that has no long-term personal relevance to any of them. Maybe they even display hysterical outrage that there are other perspectives or perceptions besides their own. They are like infants throwing a tantrum, screaming something like “I totally lack respect for the obvious reality that there are a variety of points of view!”

We could label their experience as distress. How is it that such distress could develop?

If they are attempting to organize their lives around something other than their own core interests and motivations, what would be the predictable results? That can lead to internal conflict, compromise, inefficiency, disorder, chaos, self-sabotage, exhaustion, frustration, and despair. Despair is an intense form of grief. They are despairing or desperate.

In many cases, asking for help would be the expected behavior for someone who is desperate. However, when there is also shame about the desperation, then that can produce an intense distress.

So, what is left for them to do if there is an intense repulsion to asking for help directly, but also intense desperation? They could invent an excuse for other people to offer them help. They may even construct an excuse to ask for help in a specific, limited way (without directly admitting to their desperation and distress). They may practice negligent or risky behavior to create personal breakdowns (medical, financial, social, etc) and then publicize that they have been victimized by whoever they vilify.

​How familiar does that psychological drama sound to you?​ Are you also aware of instances when you experimented with those kinds of social signals for other people to offer you help of some kind? Perhaps you have even said something like this: “Oh no, I really did not want to ask, but since you are offering…. YES! You know, as long as it is not a burden to you???”
​That is way of relating that we could call subservience or “a victim mentality.” There is a background of social anxiety and shame in relation to entire process. Instead of directly admitting to their self-interests or declining to discuss it, they may invest significant amounts of energy in to justifying their patterns of action. They are anxious or in distress about how other people in general will relate to their patterns of action.

​To summarize what we have covered so far, we just reviewed two basic contrasting patterns of how people can relate to what matters most to them. They can respect what matters most or they can neglect what matters most to them (typically, to focus instead on competing for social validation of any kind). Of course, attracting a specific form of social validation might occasionally be the most important outcome to someone. However, for people who have been programmed by special interest groups to neglect their self-interests and agonize over constant social validation, how much frustration would we expect for those people to experience? How much distress would we expect for them to experience? How much shame?

Realistically, there is a broad spectrum between the two extremes of intensely focusing one’s own attention on one’s self-interests and intense concentration on competing with others for social validation. Which extreme would we call “inner peace” and which would we call “distressed hysteria?” Which would we call “being self-aware” and which would we call “being self-conscious?”



Next, we will consider the importance of some different kinds of social nets. By social net, I mean a network of people who are connected to each other in some​ measurable way (even if they people do not recognize or understand the social net).

With the following ideas, we can consider what are the distinct benefits and risks of social nets as well as when they are most beneficial or most dangerous. Further, we will set a clear framework for us to later explore the actual social nets in which we may be operating. For instance, special interest groups may promote the formation of specific kinds of social nets, such as taxpayers. The metaphors below will ease us in to precisely recognizing the purposes of the social programs that special interest groups may use to organize their human resources.

Now, i​magine a group of people climbing a steep mountain slope. If they link themselves together with rope, ​t​hen that will keep them close together​. In fact, even​ if one or two individuals stumbles or slides, then their connection to the rest of the group will promote the safety and well-being  of all of the individuals, r​ight?
So, h​ow many people were in the group that you imagine​d​? Was it less than 10? ​W​as it less than 100? ​W​as it less than 1 billion?
What happens when the size of the group of people who are climbing the mountain gets so large that each individual cannot see how many people are in the group? ​ What if each individual is just one in 1000 or one in 1 million?

There is a unique danger when very large groups of people link themselves together. First, it becomes very difficult to change the momentum of the group.

If the group is moving at a very slow pace, individuals cannot stop easily and they ​also ​cannot go much faster then the rest of the group. If they are all bound together ​to each other ​with ​strong ​ropes, then the range of motion is limited to the length of the rope​ (relative to the position of others in their “social net”)​.

​Individually, they are like a dog on a chain, except that their chain is not fixed to a single location. Their chain is stuck not in the ground, ​b​ut to the other members of their group.
​I​f the whole group is going fast, then the individual must also go fast. If the group is moving faster than the individual can make sense of, then they will experience disorientation and confusion. Eventually, they may close their eyes to their surroundings and surrender to the flow of the main stream.
​S​o far, I have focused on the issue of how many individuals are bound together in the group. I have also mentioned the speed that the group is traveling​. What other issues could make a difference?

Another obvious issue is the ​maximum ​distance between individuals. How far can and individual go without ​completely disconnecting from the social net?

Also, can they disconnect? Do they even think of doing that? Do they know how? Is it a simple latch that everyone regularly uses to disconnect or reconnect, such as every time they stop at a safe place to rest? Or are they trapped for years in a chain gang or by their very own chain to a heavy ball?

​Next, what is the material used for binding the people together? Is it normal rope? If so, how well-made is it? Or, is it a flexible material that can easily stretch and still remain strong? Is it a heavy metal chain, like in a caravan of slaves or prison inmates? Does the material tangle easily? Is there a need to occasionally take time to untangle it?

Also, if there were only two people who linked themselves together on purpose, then they might be able to easily communicate with each other. In contrast, with a huge group, no one individual would be able to directly get the attention of all of the others (not even by screaming or tugging on the rope). It would take many individuals within the group to be able to get the attention of the entire group or herd.

​A final issue that I did not mention yet is the ​weather in which they are climbing the mountain. For instance, ​are there gusts of wind? ​I​s there a storm or clear skies? What is the temperature​?​Are the slopes icy? (Exactly what is the terrain like on the mountain?)
Perhaps we would even dare to raise the question of where are they going and why? For now, be aware that there a variety of forms of social nets in which people are physically connected to each other, such as mountain climbers or chain gains. In some cases, people could only participate after volunteering (and perhaps meeting some requirements, paying some fees, passing some tests, and so on). In other cases, people may be born in to their status within a social net.

In general, the use of social ​ne​ts or networks​ can be very beneficial  (at least to the specific interest groups that promote them)​. However, in particular cases, using ​s​pecific social n​e​ts may be less effective then individual activity ​(​or even ​uniquely ​dangerous​)​. If there are different forms of social n​e​ts that are available, then only one of them will be the most appropriate in a particular case, right?

As an individual becomes a better mountain climber, they may wish to disconnect from a familiar social net and either climb on their own or find a network that is smaller and only ​includes ​climbers that are experienced and cautious​. Maybe someone even senses that the social net to which they are currently connected is unraveling or ​could be spilling​ down the side of the mountain at a fast pace. Sometimes, ​t​here is an urgent priority to disconnect from one or more social ​nets.

What kind of social net is most attractive to you? In order for people to participate in a selective group, which qualifications would be relevant (and how would those qualifications be reviewed)?


​At a later time, we can explore the issue of what social nets may already bind you . We can also explore completely releasing or slightly altering our attachment to specific nets​ or networks. Finally, once free of any tangles that might compromise our ability to focus clearly, we could even explore the issue of what social nets would we like to participate in (by forming new ones, joining old ones that we like just like they are, or reforming ones in which we are already linked).

For instance, we could also consider how we can use measurements of the herding behavior of humans to inform decisions about investing. As a quick example, note the correlation shown in the below chart pertaining to stocks of a group of mining companies in the US. The last 4 years are shown.

sentiment and pricesWhen the red line is low (indicating least optimism) and then begins to rise, that consistently correlates to future increases in price (the blue line). When the red line is high (high optimism) and then falls, then that correlates to the sharpest declines in price immediately thereafter.

In other words, the most popular ideas tend to be consistently wrong among the herds of investors. When optimism is highest, that is when there tends to be the greatest risk of a decline in price. When optimism is least (when prices are the most discounted by the masses), then that tends to be the best opportunity for making a quick, safe profit.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 298 other followers

%d bloggers like this: