People are afraid of the truth. They always have been but now we have gone full circle back to the Middle Ages when the truth could be controlled and thereby avoided. In the 18th and 19th Century truth arrived with full force. If you got sick you died, if you didn't work you starved. If you were born a man or a woman you stayed that way. Not now.
This is an important essay because it gets to the crux of what are, essentially, deliberate impediments to intellectual curiosity which represents an impediment to the development of knowledge and so human development and progress.
Actually, however, this is NOT a new phenomenon. I have always worked in the Private sector but by virtue of my work I have often interacted with senior academics who, over the years, have highlighted this as an issue in academia. That certain avenues of "research" are essentially closed because they are not "politically correct". The more recent Covid "thing" has provided ample further illustration of this phenomenon.
I find it most difficult to understand how intelligent, highly educated people can at their fundamental belief level, go along with this thinking. Yes, I understand the self-preservation aspect but there seems to be more than that going on. Like with Covid, there seems to be a macro psyop in operation which forces people to "take sides" perhaps out of "fear" and persuade themselves that "truth is lies"?
I have no political axe to grind as I regard myself as an Agorist and have no affiliation with either side of the same Red/Blue political coin, but I think any impartial observer can see the effects of such "intellectual thinking" impacting US society today. There comes a point where society must decide which road to take in the wood?
It's an open question which species of reality denial will destroy civilization first. Race denial? That's feeding the competence problem. Sex difference denial? Ditto, and wrecking relationships as well. The carbon cult? My money is on that, actually, since it points straight at a nosedive back into the iron age.
None of these "equality of outcomes" types ever seem to even consider that it might just be possible to have a lower IQ, have poorer outcomes, and also not be intrinsically inferior as a human being...or that others might be able to consider this to be true.
When I grew up, the superhero's nemisis was the mad genius. The idea someone could be smart, talented and dangerous was not just fiction, but had happened to my parent's generation resulting in WWII. If you have a superhero, the villian needs to be a challenge, and I think evil mad scientists were scary and still are.
The perfect example of the consequences of this type of GIGO thinking is found in our headlong rush towards 17th century living as a result of the "settled science" of "Climate Change." I have yet to find a single shred of reproducible, hard evidence to support either the green grifters loud pronouncements of impending doom or the idea that any of the idiotic measures thus far taken have amounted to anything other than the enrichment of a select few individuals. Any attempt to point this out is met with screams of anger, but no facts. It saddens me. The new joke making the rounds: What did Europeans use for lighting before candles? Electricity!
This is what Saifedean Ammous would call "Fiat Science." End the Fed, end fiat currency, and so much of this would go away, because the marketplace would not reward it and the government would not be able to.
A product of the Science Wars from the 1990's. Link is to a good basic primer on the history and progress of. (written from a Marxist perspective, but surprisingly balanced and contains links to good, credible references)
The social sciences have imposed themselves into health care policy for a long time. This Nuffield Bioethics Council guide written in 2007 explains the thinking of our self-imagined betters, our "good stewards" (benevolent authoritarians) that gets into the need for social inclusion in public health policy, nondiscriminatory coercion and manipulation with sensitivities for victim groups. (Nuffield Council is funded by Wellcome Trust - GlaxoWellcome, Big Pharma - a peer health public policy influencer of the Gates Foundation, relied upon by local and national governments around the world. The current head led the authoritarian response of the UK pandemic team, resigned when it wasn't authoritarian enough for him. The head of Nuffield LEAP has worked in senior positions in Big Tech, Big Media and DARPA - national defense psy-ops. Important note: Anthony Fauci's wife, Catherine Grady, heads up Bioethics at the National Institute of Health, works with and is heavily influenced by groups like Nuffield Bioethics Council)
"We know only a single science, the science of history. One can look at history from two sides and divide it into the history of nature and the history of men. The two sides are, however, inseparable; the history of nature and the history of men are dependent on each other so long as men exist."
The nonpharmaceutical interventions of the pandemic like masks, social distancing, lockdowns, etc are all behavioral science-based "nudges." Behavioral science is a social science. Called the "Science of Totalitarianism." Masquerading as medical science, natural science.
Marxism and Fascism are both authoritarian governing models. By merging both social and natural sciences into "one science" authoritarians are able to eliminate the contradictions found in natural science, like medical science, from their public policy dictats. Like religion, any authority capable of contradicting authoritarian public policy that the masses respect must be co-opted and made subsidiary to government or eliminated altogether. There can be only one science. The science of history. We are suffering Marxist and Fascist authoritarian governance across the globe today. We must separate the social from the natural sciences, just as surely as Galileo, Descartes and Locke did by using natural science to dispel the edicts of churches and monarchs. When they say, "follow the science" we must respond, "what *type* of science." And not let them obfuscate and continue to hide in the ambiguity of the word, "science."
But the transmission of knowledge is no longer the purpose of education, changing the worldview of each student at the level of perception and having interpretation of experiences deeply tied to emotion is. That's why the term originally developed in the 1990s--Transformational Outcomes Based Education--was created and I have tracked its use all over the world. It is tied to Theories of Change and social goals as laid out in this recent webinar. https://www.aecf.org/blog/webinar-features-experts-on-developing-a-theory-of-change
The change is sometimes at the micro level of the student's mind, neural net, or values and attitudes or at the meso level of the school or workplace, or at the macro level of a nation, its society, or the economy. It's all about how do we get to these desired goals that few of us are even aware of. Note the "so-then" chain in that webinar's graph--all those manipulated outcomes to get to a goal that is being declared with no democratic input mostly out of sight.
IQs are not the point because the changes need to occur at a neurobiological level of the vast majority of future voters. The point is not reality, but how the desired changes are likely to affect future behavior.
And yes, this is a vision that has thrown a monkey wrench into the essence of education worldwide.
Iron Law of Woke Projection never misses. They fear the agenda that would be pushed if certain science gets published, because they themselves see science as a tool to push an agenda.
If you believe that science is a direct producer of choices rather than of data, then you *must* stop any science that you consider to produce the "wrong" choices.
This makes me think of how, since it might be construed as "fat-shaming," very few people are talking about the direct correlation between obesity and poor covid outcomes. There are real steps people can take to protect themselves if objective data is allowed to come to light. Hiding truth to protect someone's feelings could, in fact, be a death sentence. The United States was founded by people who had a much higher opinion of the general population's ability to receive input and make decisions for themselves.
Interesting article but I'm a bit confused about the maths test stuff. Surely an ability to do maths is connected to the quality of the teaching as well as to a mental ability to understand it? If you are in the DRC you might be as intelligent as Einstein but if nobody teaches you any mathematics you won't be any good at it. So your test results will be rubbish. How many clever people have lived and died without achieving much because they were the wrong sex, class, race so didn't get the education? IQ, intelligence, cleverness are surely only the foundations of the building - education are the bricks (and 99% of teaching seems to be absolute crap!). You might get computer scientists in Sinapore or Hong Kong or Taiwan but you got Beethoven, Mozart, da Vinci, Shakespeare in European countries. Different sorts of intelligence?
When so many people struggle at basic math, manipulating the COVID stats for some second rate themselves public health morons was like taking candy from a baby. Part of the “maths problem” is genetic, but the deeply inadequate morons that pass for teachers in a lot of countries is also part of the problem.
Over the last two years, I have seen almost nothing written about the reduced ability of dark-skinned people to synthesize their own Vitamin D from sun exposure. All persons with darker skin should get their Vitamin D levels checked and if low, supplement with Vitamin D3 for maximum immune system enhancement. I believe this has not been promoted for many reasons, including the suppression of natural solutions to Covid infections. But the fear of racism is likely the main factor. Much shame applies here.
Excellent analysis. Not bad for a cat! Much of what passes as "science" these days is actually what CS Lewis called "Scientism" -- and this trend is only getting worse. Wish you could come to our conference, el gato. This is exactly the sort of thing we want to talk about: freespeechinmedicine.com
Woke thinking on gender, race, climate, law, history and covid, garbage in garbage out for the purpose of destroying Western Civilization and America to institute global technocratic, transhumanist government and a covert, controlled, eugenics depopulation plan.
People are afraid of the truth. They always have been but now we have gone full circle back to the Middle Ages when the truth could be controlled and thereby avoided. In the 18th and 19th Century truth arrived with full force. If you got sick you died, if you didn't work you starved. If you were born a man or a woman you stayed that way. Not now.
This is an important essay because it gets to the crux of what are, essentially, deliberate impediments to intellectual curiosity which represents an impediment to the development of knowledge and so human development and progress.
Actually, however, this is NOT a new phenomenon. I have always worked in the Private sector but by virtue of my work I have often interacted with senior academics who, over the years, have highlighted this as an issue in academia. That certain avenues of "research" are essentially closed because they are not "politically correct". The more recent Covid "thing" has provided ample further illustration of this phenomenon.
I find it most difficult to understand how intelligent, highly educated people can at their fundamental belief level, go along with this thinking. Yes, I understand the self-preservation aspect but there seems to be more than that going on. Like with Covid, there seems to be a macro psyop in operation which forces people to "take sides" perhaps out of "fear" and persuade themselves that "truth is lies"?
I have no political axe to grind as I regard myself as an Agorist and have no affiliation with either side of the same Red/Blue political coin, but I think any impartial observer can see the effects of such "intellectual thinking" impacting US society today. There comes a point where society must decide which road to take in the wood?
It's an open question which species of reality denial will destroy civilization first. Race denial? That's feeding the competence problem. Sex difference denial? Ditto, and wrecking relationships as well. The carbon cult? My money is on that, actually, since it points straight at a nosedive back into the iron age.
None of these "equality of outcomes" types ever seem to even consider that it might just be possible to have a lower IQ, have poorer outcomes, and also not be intrinsically inferior as a human being...or that others might be able to consider this to be true.
When I grew up, the superhero's nemisis was the mad genius. The idea someone could be smart, talented and dangerous was not just fiction, but had happened to my parent's generation resulting in WWII. If you have a superhero, the villian needs to be a challenge, and I think evil mad scientists were scary and still are.
The perfect example of the consequences of this type of GIGO thinking is found in our headlong rush towards 17th century living as a result of the "settled science" of "Climate Change." I have yet to find a single shred of reproducible, hard evidence to support either the green grifters loud pronouncements of impending doom or the idea that any of the idiotic measures thus far taken have amounted to anything other than the enrichment of a select few individuals. Any attempt to point this out is met with screams of anger, but no facts. It saddens me. The new joke making the rounds: What did Europeans use for lighting before candles? Electricity!
This is what Saifedean Ammous would call "Fiat Science." End the Fed, end fiat currency, and so much of this would go away, because the marketplace would not reward it and the government would not be able to.
A product of the Science Wars from the 1990's. Link is to a good basic primer on the history and progress of. (written from a Marxist perspective, but surprisingly balanced and contains links to good, credible references)
https://magazine.scienceforthepeople.org/vol22-1/science-wars-the-next-generation/
The social sciences have imposed themselves into health care policy for a long time. This Nuffield Bioethics Council guide written in 2007 explains the thinking of our self-imagined betters, our "good stewards" (benevolent authoritarians) that gets into the need for social inclusion in public health policy, nondiscriminatory coercion and manipulation with sensitivities for victim groups. (Nuffield Council is funded by Wellcome Trust - GlaxoWellcome, Big Pharma - a peer health public policy influencer of the Gates Foundation, relied upon by local and national governments around the world. The current head led the authoritarian response of the UK pandemic team, resigned when it wasn't authoritarian enough for him. The head of Nuffield LEAP has worked in senior positions in Big Tech, Big Media and DARPA - national defense psy-ops. Important note: Anthony Fauci's wife, Catherine Grady, heads up Bioethics at the National Institute of Health, works with and is heavily influenced by groups like Nuffield Bioethics Council)
https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Public-health-ethical-issues.pdf
Marx and Engels wrote:
"We know only a single science, the science of history. One can look at history from two sides and divide it into the history of nature and the history of men. The two sides are, however, inseparable; the history of nature and the history of men are dependent on each other so long as men exist."
http://www.autodidactproject.org/quote/marxsci2.html
The nonpharmaceutical interventions of the pandemic like masks, social distancing, lockdowns, etc are all behavioral science-based "nudges." Behavioral science is a social science. Called the "Science of Totalitarianism." Masquerading as medical science, natural science.
https://web.archive.org/web/20210519003131/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/14/scientists-admit-totalitarian-use-fear-control-behaviour-covid/
Marxism and Fascism are both authoritarian governing models. By merging both social and natural sciences into "one science" authoritarians are able to eliminate the contradictions found in natural science, like medical science, from their public policy dictats. Like religion, any authority capable of contradicting authoritarian public policy that the masses respect must be co-opted and made subsidiary to government or eliminated altogether. There can be only one science. The science of history. We are suffering Marxist and Fascist authoritarian governance across the globe today. We must separate the social from the natural sciences, just as surely as Galileo, Descartes and Locke did by using natural science to dispel the edicts of churches and monarchs. When they say, "follow the science" we must respond, "what *type* of science." And not let them obfuscate and continue to hide in the ambiguity of the word, "science."
But the transmission of knowledge is no longer the purpose of education, changing the worldview of each student at the level of perception and having interpretation of experiences deeply tied to emotion is. That's why the term originally developed in the 1990s--Transformational Outcomes Based Education--was created and I have tracked its use all over the world. It is tied to Theories of Change and social goals as laid out in this recent webinar. https://www.aecf.org/blog/webinar-features-experts-on-developing-a-theory-of-change
The change is sometimes at the micro level of the student's mind, neural net, or values and attitudes or at the meso level of the school or workplace, or at the macro level of a nation, its society, or the economy. It's all about how do we get to these desired goals that few of us are even aware of. Note the "so-then" chain in that webinar's graph--all those manipulated outcomes to get to a goal that is being declared with no democratic input mostly out of sight.
IQs are not the point because the changes need to occur at a neurobiological level of the vast majority of future voters. The point is not reality, but how the desired changes are likely to affect future behavior.
And yes, this is a vision that has thrown a monkey wrench into the essence of education worldwide.
Iron Law of Woke Projection never misses. They fear the agenda that would be pushed if certain science gets published, because they themselves see science as a tool to push an agenda.
If you believe that science is a direct producer of choices rather than of data, then you *must* stop any science that you consider to produce the "wrong" choices.
This makes me think of how, since it might be construed as "fat-shaming," very few people are talking about the direct correlation between obesity and poor covid outcomes. There are real steps people can take to protect themselves if objective data is allowed to come to light. Hiding truth to protect someone's feelings could, in fact, be a death sentence. The United States was founded by people who had a much higher opinion of the general population's ability to receive input and make decisions for themselves.
Interesting article but I'm a bit confused about the maths test stuff. Surely an ability to do maths is connected to the quality of the teaching as well as to a mental ability to understand it? If you are in the DRC you might be as intelligent as Einstein but if nobody teaches you any mathematics you won't be any good at it. So your test results will be rubbish. How many clever people have lived and died without achieving much because they were the wrong sex, class, race so didn't get the education? IQ, intelligence, cleverness are surely only the foundations of the building - education are the bricks (and 99% of teaching seems to be absolute crap!). You might get computer scientists in Sinapore or Hong Kong or Taiwan but you got Beethoven, Mozart, da Vinci, Shakespeare in European countries. Different sorts of intelligence?
When so many people struggle at basic math, manipulating the COVID stats for some second rate themselves public health morons was like taking candy from a baby. Part of the “maths problem” is genetic, but the deeply inadequate morons that pass for teachers in a lot of countries is also part of the problem.
Over the last two years, I have seen almost nothing written about the reduced ability of dark-skinned people to synthesize their own Vitamin D from sun exposure. All persons with darker skin should get their Vitamin D levels checked and if low, supplement with Vitamin D3 for maximum immune system enhancement. I believe this has not been promoted for many reasons, including the suppression of natural solutions to Covid infections. But the fear of racism is likely the main factor. Much shame applies here.
Excellent analysis. Not bad for a cat! Much of what passes as "science" these days is actually what CS Lewis called "Scientism" -- and this trend is only getting worse. Wish you could come to our conference, el gato. This is exactly the sort of thing we want to talk about: freespeechinmedicine.com
Woke thinking on gender, race, climate, law, history and covid, garbage in garbage out for the purpose of destroying Western Civilization and America to institute global technocratic, transhumanist government and a covert, controlled, eugenics depopulation plan.