|
| :: Previous topic :: Next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fintan
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 6098
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 5:14 pm Post subject: Psychopathic Personalities & The Custodians of Chaos |
  |
|
In this exclusive extract from his forthcoming memoirs, Kurt Vonnegut
is horrified by the hypocrisy in contemporary US politics.
| Quote: | Custodians of chaos
by Kurt Vonnegut
January 21, 2006 - Guardian
"Do unto others what you would have them do unto you." A lot of people think Jesus said that, because it is so much the sort of thing Jesus liked to say. But it was actually said by Confucius, a Chinese philosopher, five hundred years before there was that greatest and most humane of human beings, named Jesus Christ.
The Chinese also gave us, via Marco Polo, pasta and the formula for gunpowder. The Chinese were so dumb they only used gunpowder for fireworks. And everybody was so dumb back then that nobody in either hemisphere even knew that there was another one.
We've sure come a long way since then. Sometimes I wish we hadn't. I hate H-bombs and the Jerry Springer Show
But back to people like Confucius and Jesus and my son the doctor, Mark, each of whom have said in their own way how we could behave more humanely and maybe make the world a less painful place. One of my favourite humans is Eugene Debs, from Terre Haute in my native state of Indiana.
Get a load of this. Eugene Debs, who died back in 1926, when I was not yet four, ran five times as the Socialist party candidate for president, winning 900,000 votes, almost 6 percent of the popular vote, in 1912, if you can imagine such a ballot. He had this to say while campaigning:
"As long as there is a lower class, I am in it.
"As long as there is a criminal element, I am of it.
"As long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free."
Doesn't anything socialistic make you want to throw up? Like great public schools, or health insurance for all?
When you get out of bed each morning, with the roosters crowing, wouldn't you like to say. "As long as there is a lower class, I am in it. As long as there is a criminal element, I am of it. As long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free."
How about Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes?
Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Earth.
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.
And so on.
Not exactly planks in a Republican platform. Not exactly George W Bush, Dick Cheney, or Donald Rumsfeld stuff.
For some reason, the most vocal Christians among us never mention the Beatitudes. But, often with tears in their eyes, they demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public buildings. And of course that's Moses, not Jesus. I haven't heard one of them demand that the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes, be posted anywhere.
"Blessed are the merciful" in a courtroom? "Blessed are the peacemakers" in the Pentagon? Give me a break!
It so happens that idealism enough for anyone is not made of perfumed pink clouds. It is the law! It is the US Constitution.
But I myself feel that our country, for whose Constitution I fought in a just war, might as well have been invaded by Martians and body snatchers. Sometimes I wish it had been. What has happened instead is that it was taken over by means of the sleaziest, low-comedy, Keystone Cops-style coup d'état imaginable.
I was once asked if I had any ideas for a really scary reality TV show. I have one reality show that would really make your hair stand on end: "C-Students from Yale".
George W Bush has gathered around him upper-crust C-students who know no history or geography, plus not-so-closeted white supremacists, aka Christians, and plus, most frighteningly, psychopathic personalities, or PPs, the medical term for smart, personable people who have no consciences.
To say somebody is a PP is to make a perfectly respectable diagnosis, like saying he or she has appendicitis or athlete's foot. The classic medical text on PPs is The Mask of Sanity by Dr Hervey Cleckley, a clinical professor of psychiatry at the Medical College of Georgia, published in 1941. Read it!
Some people are born deaf, some are born blind or whatever, and this book is about congenitally defective human beings of a sort that is making this whole country and many other parts of the planet go completely haywire nowadays. These were people born without consciences, and suddenly they are taking charge of everything.
PPs are presentable, they know full well the suffering their actions may cause others, but they do not care. They cannot care because they are nuts. They have a screw loose!
And what syndrome better describes so many executives at Enron and WorldCom and on and on, who have enriched themselves while ruining their employees and investors and country and who still feel as pure as the driven snow, no matter what anybody may say to or about them? And they are waging a war that is making billionaires out of millionaires, and trillionaires out of billionaires, and they own television, and they bankroll George Bush, and not because he's against gay marriage.
So many of these heartless PPs now hold big jobs in our federal government, as though they were leaders instead of sick. They have taken charge. They have taken charge of communications and the schools, so we might as well be Poland under occupation.
They might have felt that taking our country into an endless war was simply something decisive to do. What has allowed so many PPs to rise so high in corporations, and now in government, is that they are so decisive. They are going to do something every fuckin' day and they are not afraid. Unlike normal people, they are never filled with doubts, for the simple reason that they don't give a fuck what happens next. Simply can't. Do this! Do that! Mobilise the reserves! Privatise the public schools! Attack Iraq! Cut health care! Tap everybody's telephone! Cut taxes on the rich! Build a trillion-dollar missile shield! Fuck habeas corpus and the Sierra Club and In These Times, and kiss my ass!
There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don't know what can be done to fix it. This is it: only nut cases want to be president. This was true even in high school. Only clearly disturbed people ran for class president.
The title of Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is a parody of the title of Ray Bradbury's great science-fiction novel Fahrenheit 451. Four hundred and fifty-one degrees Fahrenheit is the combustion point, incidentally, of paper, of which books are composed. The hero of Bradbury's novel is a municipal worker whose job is burning books.
While on the subject of burning books, I want to congratulate librarians, not famous for their physical strength, who, all over this country, have staunchly resisted anti-democratic bullies who have tried to remove certain books from their shelves, and destroyed records rather than have to reveal to thought police the names of persons who have checked out those titles.
So the America I loved still exists, if not in the White House, the Supreme Court, the Senate, the House of Representatives, or the media. The America I loved still exists at the front desks of our public libraries.
And still on the subject of books: our daily news sources, newspapers and TV, are now so craven, so unvigilant on behalf of the American people, so uninformative, that only in books do we learn what's really going on.
I will cite an example: House of Bush, House of Saud by Craig Unger, published in early 2004, that humiliating, shameful, blood-soaked year.
In case you haven't noticed, as the result of a shamelessly rigged election in Florida, in which thousands of African-Americans were arbitrarily disenfranchised, we now present ourselves to the rest of the world as proud, grinning, jut-jawed, pitiless war-lovers with appallingly powerful weaponry - who stand unopposed.
In case you haven't noticed, we are now as feared and hated all over the world as Nazis once were.
And with good reason.
In case you haven't noticed, our unelected leaders have dehumanised millions and millions of human beings simply because of their religion and race. We wound 'em and kill 'em and torture 'em and imprison 'em all we want.
Piece of cake.
In case you haven't noticed, we also dehumanised our own soldiers, not because of their religion or race, but because of their low social class.
Send 'em anywhere. Make 'em do anything.
Piece of cake.
The O'Reilly Factor.
So I am a man without a country, except for the librarians and a Chicago paper called In These Times.
Before we attacked Iraq, the majestic New York Times guaranteed there were weapons of mass destruction there.
Albert Einstein and Mark Twain gave up on the human race at the end of their lives, even though Twain hadn't even seen the first world war. War is now a form of TV entertainment, and what made the first world war so particularly entertaining were two American inventions, barbed wire and the machine gun.
Shrapnel was invented by an Englishman of the same name. Don't you wish you could have something named after you?
Like my distinct betters Einstein and Twain, I now give up on people, too. I am a veteran of the second world war and I have to say this is not the first time I have surrendered to a pitiless war machine.
My last words? "Life is no way to treat an animal, not even a mouse."
Napalm came from Harvard. Veritas
Our president is a Christian? So was Adolf Hitler. What can be said to our young people, now that psychopathic personalities, which is to say persons without consciences, without senses of pity or shame, have taken all the money in the treasuries of our government and corporations, and made it all their own?
http://books.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,5378463-101750,00.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
heiho1
Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm currently reading
9/11 THE
ULTIMATE TRUTH
at the behest of a researcher. The book's introduction consists of a lengthy series of quotations from a scientist who conducted research into "ponerology", the study of evil. This research was apparently conducted in Europe *during* World War II and center on how pathological people may "infect" large numbers of people through very subtle social processes. The description of that "infection" is practically identical to the Ellworth Toohey character in Ayn Rand's THE FOUNTAINHEAD. Pathological people lack the necessary empathy with "normal" people to form meaningful social bonds and so, according to the statements of the quoted material, seek out other morally deficient people with whom they *do* share a bond [the lack of empathy for "normal" people]. As these pathological people congregate, they subvert and take over popular movements, turning those movements to their own devices.
The book is so far [only a hundred pages into it] very well written, with a few typos [presumably happening during transcription] and the concept that "vast conspiracies" need not exist as formal structures but as "infections" of pathological individuals amassing power for themselves by forming patholocial social networks is something that is worth considering.
In the Star Trek episode DAY OF THE DOVE, some Klingon's are trapped aboard the USS Enterprise with Captain Kirk and his crew. There is also a typically shiny alien energy being on board that feeds off of negative emotions. The alien causes the Klingons and Kirk's crew to fight to the death, resurrecting them as they die to fight again.
The Klingons and Kirk's crew can only save themselves after realizing that they have, in a sense, been infected with "hate" [aka "evil"] and that they must let go of their hatreds to defeat the alien, which feeds on hate.
This is one of the truly classic Star Trek episodes and a perfect allegory for the scientific description of "ponerology" given in 911 THE ULTIMATE TRUTH. It also explains why I have been so mystified by the antics of the current "administration"...I just can't grasp the motivations of fundamentally psychologically flawed individuals who have reached the zenith of their wanton pathological pursuit of power.
That said, the book is giving me a conceptual framework for understanding how "evil" might spread throughout an entire social framework *without* resorting to Illuminati conspiracies and men in satanic black masses. Well worth considering. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hawkwind
Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 686
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:27 pm Post subject: Lack of Empathy IS the Key |
|
|
A while back BFN posted an audio interview with a doctor named Jack Dresser. Audio Anyway, the topic was on a psychological process called "scripting". In a nutshell, people are driven to interact with each other through a social scripting process ... generally predictable based on the roles each of us act out in the "script". A key element of staying healthy in any presented "script" is to recognize the process as it happens and change your assigned character role. Hopefully this act changes the outcome of the interaction.
"Empathy" or lack of, plays a key role in the direction of the "script". These concepts are touched upon in the audio, but I took the time to have an email interchange with Dr. Dresser about the subject ... he is a very bright guy! Sadly, the healthy development of "empathy" is realized at about 8 to 9 years of age. If this healthy sense is not embraced as a character trait at this early age, it probably will never be achieved in a person's lifetime. 
So I guess that our only hope is to diligently evaluate the way we interact with each other when acting out our "scripts" and make sure that we encourage "empathy", in our children. Or we could just blow this whole mess up according to the current running "script" and take a chance on starting over again ....
- Hawk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevensnell
Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was pretty shocked reading KV's comments. I was shocked because for someone of his background (I read the bio on his website) he seems to have little understanding or grasp of global events. This is not to say that I have all the answers.
The examples KV raises are bland, talked over points. His knowledge of history seems to be disproportionately biased towards western superiority shown by his comments about China. He chastises the Bush administration for lack of historical knowledge, yet rolls out the same old wives tales as any 'c' grade student.
The fireworks are a perfect example. "the chinese were so dumb" - Really? To pay for the pasta KV brings up, they invented paper money. They also invented measuring systems, canals, arched bridges, seismographs, paper armour, plastic and spun silk to name but a few. By discovering a compound that ultimately changed the world (gunpowder), kept within its own borders for hundreds of years and used for both War and celebration, they don't seem dumb to me. The Chinese were quite proficient in astronomy and predicting the movement of stars/ celestial objects, and along with most other civilisations that were writing, using mathmatics in the Mid/Far East were probably laughing at the european traders that ambled their way across the border.
Chris Rock made the 'C' student comment a couple of years back about George Bush and made a stronger point about his affect on the US. So why does KV revisit these issues so poorly now? It seem to me he presents an appalling m-istory lesson.
His argument about psychopathic personalities is nonsensical. Let's use his modern examples - Enron and Worldcom. If you are familiar with 'The smartest guys in the room' or similar documentaries about Enron and its executives, you can see exactly why they acted in that manner - the interviews with them are quite good for that.
Any argument/theory that categorises people in order that you can attach either positive or negative traits is practically racism. I've got one for you - it was developed in the 1800's as way to detect criminal minds - its all scientific, i just need to touch the bumps on your head  Admitedly I haven't read the 1941 source he mentions, but if its as reliable as all those other scientific text books of the 1940's...
Libraries, Farenheit 9/11, House of Bush/Saud!? - I can't wait for his expose on the Monica Lewinsky scandal. KV's other examples like the O Reilly factor also seem lacking in substance - what about the O Reilly Factor? Is it that Fox News bias? Hey, at least they are honest about it. I don't agree with it and that's why the remote control is useful, but compare them to any other 24hr news network for a 'message' and they come out on top. That's also why they are doing so well IMO. If another news network had the b*lls to say their message was 'the truth', we might get somewhere.
I'm sorry, but I'll never be able to accept 'ponerology' Heiho1, although I haven't seen the ST episode you mention (I don't mean to sound rude, I actually love ST:TNG). The problems with 'evil' anything is that there must be significant numbers of 'good' too. During the 1940's it was probably easy to make sweeping statements about populations around the world, but in todays world, there's no way without having to back it up. Where are the evil 2%/5%/20%? How many people did we all grow up with that are 'evil'? I hate to sound all Dizney about this, but I think there are devices in everyone that allows them to conduct themselves in manner both good and bad. For all we know, Ghandi was a terrible wife beater, John Paul the II was a racist and Queen Victoria was a thief of children's toys. Every person will react differently to any given situation based on their own past experiences. If you 'marmite' the world (hate/love) surely there should also be thousands of saints walking around giving out cash and food? I only see bono and he's a dick.
I agree with Hawkwind about empathy but not in relation to scripts. If there are scripting cues, I've lost my copy. I for one, like George Constanza, have the ability to detect the slightest human suffering. I'm detecting something right now
Regards, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
heiho1
Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stevensnell wrote: | I was pretty shocked reading KV's comments. I was shocked because for someone of his background (I read the bio on his website) he seems to have little understanding or grasp of global events. This is not to say that I have all the answers.
|
That's funny, I read the same article and found him to be on point.
| Quote: |
The examples KV raises are bland, talked over points. His knowledge of history seems to be disproportionately biased towards western superiority shown by his comments about China. He chastises the Bush administration for lack of historical knowledge, yet rolls out the same old wives tales as any 'c' grade student.
|
Vonnegut said | Vonnegut wrote: | "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you." A lot of people think Jesus said that, because it is so much the sort of thing Jesus liked to say. But it was actually said by Confucius, a Chinese philosopher, five hundred years before there was that greatest and most humane of human beings, named Jesus Christ.
The Chinese also gave us, via Marco Polo, pasta and the formula for gunpowder. The Chinese were so dumb they only used gunpowder for fireworks. And everybody was so dumb back then that nobody in either hemisphere even knew that there was another one. |
He's being sarcastic...and is actually making it clear that the Chinese were smart enough to restrict gunpowder to use in fireworks. "Wives tale" is too vauge for me to know what you mean, other than to make a gross generalization on the entire article.
| Quote: |
The fireworks are a perfect example. "the chinese were so dumb" - Really? To pay for the pasta KV brings up, they invented paper money. They also invented measuring systems, canals, arched bridges, seismographs, paper armour, plastic and spun silk to name but a few. By discovering a compound that ultimately changed the world (gunpowder), kept within its own borders for hundreds of years and used for both War and celebration, they don't seem dumb to me. The Chinese were quite proficient in astronomy and predicting the movement of stars/ celestial objects, and along with most other civilisations that were writing, using mathmatics in the Mid/Far East were probably laughing at the european traders that ambled their way across the border.
|
Again, I read Vonnegut as being sarcastic...
| Quote: |
Chris Rock made the 'C' student comment a couple of years back about George Bush and made a stronger point about his affect on the US. So why does KV revisit these issues so poorly now? It seem to me he presents an appalling m-istory lesson.
|
Yes, well a "C" student is "average" by definition. Our "President" should be *exemplary* or he may just guide the nation into mediocrity.
| Quote: |
His argument about psychopathic personalities is nonsensical. Let's use his modern examples - Enron and Worldcom. If you are familiar with 'The smartest guys in the room' or similar documentaries about Enron and its executives, you can see exactly why they acted in that manner - the interviews with them are quite good for that.
|
I haven't seen the documentary but I did hear a recording of Enron traders gloating over inflating California energy prices. They certainly seemed to lack any empathy for the people whose lives they were injuring in the name of profit.
| Quote: |
Any argument/theory that categorises people in order that you can attach either positive or negative traits is practically racism. I've got one for you - it was developed in the 1800's as way to detect criminal minds - its all scientific, i just need to touch the bumps on your head Admitedly I haven't read the 1941 source he mentions, but if its as reliable as all those other scientific text books of the 1940's...
|
Well, read the book before *assuming* you know what it says. I don't agree with the entire text but it *is* very accurate in describing the social phenomenon I see now taking place.
| Quote: |
Libraries, Farenheit 9/11, House of Bush/Saud!? - I can't wait for his expose on the Monica Lewinsky scandal. KV's other examples like the O Reilly factor also seem lacking in substance - what about the O Reilly Factor? Is it that Fox News bias? Hey, at least they are honest about it. I don't agree with it and that's why the remote control is useful, but compare them to any other 24hr news network for a 'message' and they come out on top. That's also why they are doing so well IMO. If another news network had the b*lls to say their message was 'the truth', we might get somewhere.
|
I don't watch Faux News and have no interest in it. Most "news" programs I see today are not "news" programs at all but appear to be drama television aimed at easily gratified audiences...meaning that they are not my typical viewing fare at all.
| Quote: |
I'm sorry, but I'll never be able to accept 'ponerology' Heiho1, although I haven't seen the ST episode you mention (I don't mean to sound rude, I actually love ST:TNG). The problems with 'evil' anything is that there must be significant numbers of 'good' too. During the 1940's it was probably easy to make sweeping statements about populations around the world, but in todays world, there's no way without having to back it up. Where are the evil 2%/5%/20%? How many people did we all grow up with that are 'evil'? I hate to sound all Dizney about this, but I think there are devices in everyone that allows them to conduct themselves in manner both good and bad. For all we know, Ghandi was a terrible wife beater, John Paul the II was a racist and Queen Victoria was a thief of children's toys. Every person will react differently to any given situation based on their own past experiences. If you 'marmite' the world (hate/love) surely there should also be thousands of saints walking around giving out cash and food? I only see bono and he's a dick.
|
Given that you don't know any of my sources, it's difficult to respond to your assumptions but the essence of the ponerological study was that there is a very small percentage of individuals who suffered damage to certain critical sections of their brains, mainly during childbirth. This brain damage causes certain normal brain functions not to occur, leading to, essentially, a lack of empathy and a pathological need for power over "normal" people.
| Quote: |
I agree with Hawkwind about empathy but not in relation to scripts. If there are scripting cues, I've lost my copy. I for one, like George Constanza, have the ability to detect the slightest human suffering. I'm detecting something right now
|
Sound great...I certainly see predefined scripts being played out on a daily basis. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Toto
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 348
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 11:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Most people are just repeaters running off programming that they got from the media.... They are predictable and boring. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevensnell
Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi heiho1,
Perhaps I've misunderstood Vonnegut. I didn't realise he was being sarcastic, so we can clear that up. Also, I was being sarcastic in some places so lets call it even.
Regarding the fireworks point, the term 'wives tale' was used in reference to the fireworks/hemisphere comment, but I could have also used the phrase 'folk lore/legend', 'common misconception' etc etc. The chinese didn't restrict the use of gunpowder, that's a misconception. There's quite a lot of evidence to say that it was used for both general and psychological warfare (ie scare the enemy with wizz/bangs and minor explosives launched). I came across this on a scroogle search referring to the many uses, including "blinding powder...poison powder...burning powder".
In the words of McBain "that is the joke". Chris Rock made the joke/observation that (paraphrase) "if you're a black 'c' student in america you can't even manage a mcdonalds, meanwhile a white 'c' student just happens to be the president of the united states". I was trying to put across that this is common ground (or what I thought was common in American culture) and for someone of KV's stature (literary tallman) I would have liked to have seen something with a bit more punch. Its like saying George bush has trouble with public speaking.
In regard to the Enron issue, that's exactly my point and I'm glad you've heard the recording; whether it was the guys joking about how they are going to screw grandma's for more cash, or about turning off the power for some reason. Lacking empathy is one thing. I lack empathy in lots of situations; when i see a pregnant woman smoking. I can't empathise there, but I wouldn't consider either her or the Enron's guys 'psychopathic', but 'greedy', 'selfish', 'arrogant' -okay.
I studied some psychology/sociology in my youth and various texts about human behaviour. Which parts of the book do you agree with? I'd be interested in discussing the social phenomena you mention. I've just read a couple of articles about the book via a link-fest here and am satisfied with my original comment about that era. For those not familiar this seems to be an accepted definition from this site .
However, from that description it could be applied to everyone -but you would never know. If a psychopath is that good at concealing themselves behind the mask, how was the figure arrived at? ie 4% of the 'population' (assume USA). Really? thats around 15 million people isn't it?
Well watch Fox News before you 'assuming' you know what it says. (Joke). I don't get my information from tv news either, but I like to see the various agencies presentation of some events (e.g the new magical 'paper trail' of Saddam). Fox News hammers home the same message again and again, especially O'Reilly - Bush is right, we agree - if you don't you're wrong and most likely a traitor (and I'm going to cut your mic). Its important to see because millions of people seem to agree for whatever reason. This would make an interesting discussion about psychopathic behaviour - your average fox news viewer displays some of the classic 'symptoms': lack of responsibility for actions, ability to forget events, no feelings of guilt/remorse etc
I'd be grateful if you could provide your 'reading list' for Ponerology to help on this. Thanks for your summary though- that definately clears things up for me. You stated that "that there is a very small percentage of individuals who suffered damage to certain critical sections of their brains, mainly during childbirth. This brain damage causes certain normal brain functions not to occur, leading to, essentially, a lack of empathy and a pathological need for power over "normal" people".
Because this is such a specific action (ie the damaging of the brain) can you point me in the direction of the medical data to back that up (e.g. pictures of the damaged areas, or the names of specific parts)? Perhaps seeing the affected area in study would help me get to grips with it.
I agree with you Toto about the regurgitation from the media. That's also one of my reasons to watch certain programming. In order that I can respond to their comments from BBC news or whoever, I try watch a bit here and there. I recently saw some canadian special on 9/11 and a Channel 4 special on 'terror', not because I still have questions, but because I'd like to be 'prepared' for peoples arguments for/against.
Maybe its just me
Regards, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nemo
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 75
Location: Ireland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
heiho1 wrote | Quote: | This research was apparently conducted in Europe *during* World War II and center on how pathological people may "infect" large numbers of people through very subtle social processes. The description of that "infection" is practically identical to the Ellworth Toohey character in Ayn Rand's THE FOUNTAINHEAD. Pathological people lack the necessary empathy with "normal" people to form meaningful social bonds and so, according to the statements of the quoted material, seek out other morally deficient people with whom they *do* share a bond [the lack of empathy for "normal" people]. As these pathological people congregate, they subvert and take over popular movements, turning those movements to their own devices.
|
Isn't this a great metaphor for Smith, in the Matrix? He infects everyone and turns them into pathological clones of himself. (he says things like 'if you can't beat us join us') He is symbolic for what Richard Dawkins calls a meme, (he says at one stage in the film: "me me that's what's so good about being me there are so many me's") a virus, that spreads throughout the Matrix 'subverting it' and turning it to his own devices. ('showing no empthy' while he 'infects large numbers of people') It wouldn't surprise me if Smith was based on Toohey, as Rand's Objectivism was the philosophical root of neo-tech and the Wachowski brothers seem to big neo-techies. Everything connects.  One last thing, he is called Smith, the other two agents are Brown and Jones, because these are common names (Morphus says to Smith, when he introduces himself as A. Smith, 'you all look the same to me') , indicating we are all in danger of being 'infected', and becoming evil agents of the system.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
heiho1
Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stevensnell wrote: |
I'd be grateful if you could provide your 'reading list' for Ponerology to help on this. Thanks for your summary though- that definately clears things up for me. You stated that "that there is a very small percentage of individuals who suffered damage to certain critical sections of their brains, mainly during childbirth. This brain damage causes certain normal brain functions not to occur, leading to, essentially, a lack of empathy and a pathological need for power over "normal" people".
Because this is such a specific action (ie the damaging of the brain) can you point me in the direction of the medical data to back that up (e.g. pictures of the damaged areas, or the names of specific parts)? Perhaps seeing the affected area in study would help me get to grips with it.
|
Right now, my main source is the book 9/11 THE ULTIMATE TRUTH. I have not yet finished that book [it's one of three I am reading at the moment, sigh] so I can't provide the material you requested, but you should be able to get in touch with the author, Laura Knigh-Jadczyk, at
http://signs-of-the-times.org/
My understanding of what the book is saying is that during birth, the head of the newborn may be subjected to trauma and if that trauma damages certain regions of the brain, the brain loses certain empathic capabilities. This book is currently the *only* source of information I have on the topic of ponerology...indeed, the research book which 9/11 THE ULTIMATE TRUTH is quoting appears to have coined the use of that term.
After I read the entire book, if I am convinced that the idea merits further investigation, then the next step would be to try to locate a copy of the original book from which 9/11 THE ULTIMATE TRUTH is quoting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
heiho1
Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, I was browsing around and saw a link to a blog on ponerology:
http://ponerology.blogspot.com/
I had some problems loading this [got a 404 response somehow cached in my browser] so if you have trouble reaching the site, trying refreshing your browser. If you have curl installed [and know what that is], you can test the main page using
| Code: | | curl http://ponerology.blogspot.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevensnell
Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Heiho1,
Thanks for your reply.
I'm having a look at Laura's blog with link kindly provided and have come across some of her resources to do some further digging.
Thinking on this topic over the last few days, I'd be interested to see the rationale behind what is essentially biological damage, and personality change, particularly in light of the 'nature/nurture' element of psychology. I am reminded of the classic case study from decades ago where Phineas Gage a rail worker in the 19th Century had an Iron pin (a couple of feet long) blasted through his skull in an accident which he survived. Accounts show that his personality changed dramatically after the accident (and pin removed) even though large portions of the brain/skull were missing.
I agree that physiological symptoms affect psychology, for example conditions such as autism/downs syndrome and their differing affects on personality/emotions. However, it is the argument that any physiological condition can determine that a person is evil- that I cannot get to grips with.
Regards, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
heiho1
Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2006 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stevensnell wrote: | I agree that physiological symptoms affect psychology, for example conditions such as autism/downs syndrome and their differing affects on personality/emotions. However, it is the argument that any physiological condition can determine that a person is evil- that I cannot get to grips with.
|
Here we have to question what "evil" is. In the movie NUREMBERG, a psychologist tasked with evaluating the Nazis struggles to define "evil" and he ends up stating that "evil" is "a lack of empathy". This is a critical statement because it stands up to reasonably rigorous analysis as long as "empathy" implies that one who has "empathy" *acts* upon his "empathy".
Let us say that a man who has no empathy for others is capable of acts which most people would call "evil". This man who has no "empathy" or shared sense of compassion for his fellow men is capable of cruel or unusual acts because he lacks a moral compass by which he may determine that his actions are "wrong". There are other ways that a lack of morality may be achieved [such as indoctrination] but let us consider that there is a certain part of the human brain which controls "empathy" and that damage to such a section of the brain results in the damaged person being unable to feel empathy for others. He is *physically* unable to feel empathy as opposed to someone who is merely indoctrinated to view some class or category of humanity as "less than human". This is a critical distinction because it appears to be the assertion of the book [haven't been reading it this last week so I'm still on the same page].
Now, *if* there is a section of the brain which controls the emotion we associate with "empathy" and that section of the brain was commonly damaged by, say, older birth techniques, *then* a small portion of the population would be *physically* unable to feel "empathy". This would represent a small population of people who are emotionally unable to connect with the majority of people around them. Such people would feel different and would, naturally, seek out those who, like them, are empathically deficient. Lacking empathy, there would be no extremes that they would not be willing to go to.
This is essentially the premise of 9/11 THE ULTIMATE TRUTH so far...again, that's only a hundred or so pages into the book. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevensnell
Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi heiho1,
Sorry for the delay in writing back.
Interesting point - what is evil? Some say Knievel (sorry).
I think my definition is someone who can identify the 'right'/positive action and affect and the 'wrong'/negative action and affect, but consciously and repeatedly chooses the wrong one to the detriment of others. However, there is a scale. Using the classic 'bread' argument, repeatedly stealing bread to eat at the detriment of the baker isn't an evil pattern of behaviour, but substitute bread with say pensions, and we're getting close.
I'm not really a right/wrong person generally, but I've made my share of conscious wrong choices knowing the consequence, but I feel I have a balance with the good (I've played Fable:).
If you're finishing the book I'd be interested in your conclusions overall on the 'suspects' so to speak. Particularly in light of their families and political connections.
In terms of the 'no boundaries' argument on what an unempathic person can/can't do, I think violence or the knowledge that one's own actions/inaction have caused violence is different. Stick with me here. Let's talk Rwanda. The images were there, the vast population of the western world looked on. We've even bought the DVD's since. If the individuals in a position of power were consciously ignoring the massacre, doesn't that reflect worse on the rest of us? Same deal with Hurricaine Katrina/Pakistan Earthquake.
Regards, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dilbert_g
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stevensnell wrote: | | Ponerology ... suffered damage to certain critical sections of their brains .. |
Here's a simple alternative set of answers.
1. According to Hatfield's book (which exposed Bush's coke use), GHW was terribly emotionally injured in his youth at the death of his baby sister, from cancer, possibly brought on by exposure to those good ole Texas oil carcinogens that Poppy was bringin home on his clothes or in his semen. Pure speculation.
Anyhow, he was a REAL boy, but he was forced to bury his own feelings and take care of Bab's grief at losing her daughter, to the point that she became alarmed when she heard GWB tell his friends he couldn't play because he had to take care of mommy.
According to the typical psych script, young GWB buried his own grief, and later buried it under a frat boy, devil-may-care, alcoholic lifestyle of escapism and shallowness. This is not a stretch. With shallowness and drunkenness, you avoid deep feelings. He lived it for 30 more years or so.
2. His father was CIA, his grandfather was a participant in the Third Reich. Death for Profit. When GWB decided to become 'successful', and trade on his father's name, his father's path opened up for him. Unfortunately for us, it was the path of the political descendants of Nazis, the Nazis in America.
Previously I thought that American Business Elites supported Hitler. I recently learned from John Hankey that it's more like Chase (Rockefeller) combined with US and German Intelligence actually created "Hitler" as "Hitler".
GWB --- and I campaigned for Kerry primarily for this reason --- is a willing SOCIOPATH puppet of this long line of Fascists going back to the 1930s or 1920s, and the civil wars against the rise of Labor power in the early Industrial Age, the IWW and all that.
Make sense? Rule of the rich over the serfs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevensnell
Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi dilbert_g,
Thanks for your reply.
I'm from England - we invented "Rich rule over the serfs"
I haven't read Hatfield's book, but don't think that GHWB is any different from other parents who've lost children at a young age. The difference is in his circumstances, his opportunities - as you say his family had a profitable past and that allowed him to pursue a life of drink/drugs without consequence.
What about the Kennedys? (same suffering/same cash) Or the other families associated with WW2 profiteering (see the windfalls of war post)
George bush is a spoilt rich kid. He's not an evil genius carefully climbing the power ladder. Every spoilt rich kid I've known follows the same pattern (job working for daddy, complain about working for daddy, run daddy's business).
I'd think more people would be talking about James/Rupert Murdoch's power than the bush's (same pattern). The Murdoch's are a lot more dangerous and have the ability to communicate ideas to more people than anyone else in history.
Just remember, the presidency is not a dictatorship, despite what some might say. George and his mates might make the suggestions, but congress (and the country) go along with them.
If you're worried about Bush legacy, Robert Newman's History of Oil should give some insight into the shape of things to come.
Regards, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
