The Dumb Earthers

If you poke around enough you may be shocked to discover that a large number of people around the world believe that the Earth is flat. They have what they call "evidence" to prove their position (although, as in most cases of extreme cognitive dissonance gone askew, they choose to ignore the mountains of relevant evidence in favor of their custom made arguments that are designed to fit their desired model/outcome).

So how is it that people with enough brain cells to tie shoes and turn door knobs can be so easily swayed to believe something that is so profoundly untrue?

The answer: Cognitive Dissonance!

The brain defends its view of reality (understanding of the world around) by creating reality tunnels that fit the desired model. The end result is already achieved and only specific information is allowed in to support that ideal. Any other information is dismissed, modified, or explained away as a conspiracy or a delusion. When within the trap the mind truly experiences the false information and outcome as real. Then the brain must defend this reality by creating a justification as to why anything that conflicts with it is wrong.

Psychology expert Kendra Cherry describes Cognitive Dissonance this way:

"What Is Cognitive Dissonance? Psychologist Leon Festinger proposed a theory of cognitive dissonance centered on how people try to reach internal consistency. He suggested that people have an inner need to ensure that their beliefs and behaviors are consistent. Inconsistent or conflicting beliefs leads to disharmony, which people strive to avoid."

A common argument offered to the sane world by the Dumb Earthers is that their belief has evidence and the "belief" that the Earth is a globe is only based on conspiratorial lies given to us by NASA, and that the Earth being a globe is merely a "belief" based on what we have been told. Well, actually, they are stating exactly the problem with their argument, I suppose that is some subconscious projection.
They seem to think that this is a "belief vs belief" scenario and they urge us to "do the research". Well the research has been done and is exhaustive, and EVERY SINGLE POSITION they offer to support the flat Earth idea has been logically debunked. Science has taken an open position to understand reality, whereas the Dumb Earthers have taken a closed position and select their evidence to fit the closed position.
I do not believe the Earth is a globe, I UNDERSTAND that the Earth is a globe. There's a big difference.

With access to information available at the present time (2016) there should not be a single person on Earth who believes the Earth is flat, but there are many who do. That's because our psychological flaws and deficiencies will carry on far beyond our ability to control or correct them.

I will admit that while it is easy to understand that the Earth is a globe, it is not always easy for the weak-minded to understand the functions of their mind or to understand the what/why/how of beliefs.

“The church says the earth is flat; but I have seen its shadow on the moon, and I have more confidence even in a shadow than in the church.”
― Ferdinand Magellan

Don't accidently walk of the edge, my friends!

Not All Opinions Are Equal (Some Are Wrong!)

Not All Opinions Are Equal

There’s a strange notion making the rounds that everyone has an opinion that should be heard and tolerated/accepted.

But there is a difference between having different opinions and having a wrong opinion. Some opinions do not deserve a voice at the table. 

Opinions are important, especially differing opinions. Various minds coming together with different ideas can lead to progress and greater ideas. In fact we can see throughout history what atrocities have occurred when like minds get together to form a majority. And we have seen positive advances in society, technology, and culture when people of various ideas put their minds together.

Some opinions are facts. Some are good theories and hypotheses. Some opinions are useful and hold merit. Some do not. Please note that a wrong opinion is not one that is simply disagreed with because it does not match another. A differing opinion is not always a wrong opinion. I am not suggesting moral relativism here. There can be varying degree of perceived "right" and "wrong" or "more right" and "more wrong". We see a great many people getting offended over nonsense that differs with their nonsense. They are appalled at things they find different and choose to be offended. This is usually a mix of entitlement, political correctness, certitude, and a defensiveness of their belief.

But there is also a such thing as WRONG opinions…

An example:

Suppose we are sitting at a table having a group discussion about human sexuality. There would be many different ideas and beliefs presented about the subject based on the particular experiences and moralities of the people in the discussion.

Now a particular person interjects that his belief is that adults should be permitted to have sex with children. This person does not only have a different belief than everyone else at the table, he also has a WRONG belief. In no way can pedophilia be justified as a legitimate opinion. Rightfully so, the guy is removed from the table with a kick to the face and then some.

Another example:

A discussion is taking place about the Jewish culture; the foods, language, and customs. Suddenly a high strung guy with a silly little moustache stands up and proclaims that Jews are inferior and should be sent away to their deaths. Adolf does not have a mere difference of opinion with the gathering, he has a WRONG opinion that he is presenting. Appropriately he is removed from the table with a kick to the face and then some.

And another example:

The discussion of American national policy is happening at our table. The person with the least brain cells, a psychologically deficient dickwad, say that we need to round up all Muslims and put them into camps. He truly believes he is right and does not see it as hate and sees no parallel to the atrocities of history because blah blah blah. Guess what happens next! That’s right. He is removed from the table by a kick to the face and then some!

And another example:

Tristan is a nice young fellow sitting at the table. When the topic of music comes up he asserts with a gleam in his eye that Justin Beiber is great and far greater than The Beatles. Ok, we won’t kick him in the face for this invalid opinion, but he does have to sit in the corner listening to every Beatles album for the rest of the night!

Not all opinions have merit. Some are wrong and do not deserve a place at the table. You may notice that wrong opinions usually involve some sort of damaging or elitist position. Although it is true that there should be no legislation against free speech, if people want to get really ignorant, they should be ready for the free speech to come back at them, and then some!

"My psychiatrist told me I was crazy and I said I want a second opinion. He said okay, you're ugly too."

-Rodney Dangerfield

Definition:

wrong

rôNG/

adjective

adjective: wrong

1. 1.

   not correct or true.

   "that is the wrong answer"

   synonyms:

   incorrect, mistaken, in error, erroneous, inaccurate, inexact, imprecise, fallacious, wide of the mark, off target, unsound, faulty; informalout "the wrong answer"

   antonyms:

   right, correct

   • mistaken.

     "I was wrong about him being on the yacht that evening"
     
     
   • unsuitable or undesirable.

     "they asked all the wrong questions"

     synonyms:

     inappropriate, unsuitable, inapt, inapposite, undesirable; More ill-advised, ill-considered, ill-judged, impolitic, injudicious, infelicitous, unfitting, out of keeping, improper; informalout of order "he knew he had said the wrong thing"

     antonyms:

     appropriate

     
     
   • in a bad or abnormal condition; amiss.

     "something was wrong with the pump"

     synonyms:

     amiss, awry, out of order, not right, faulty, flawed, defective "there's something wrong with the engine"

     
     
2. 2.

   unjust, dishonest, or immoral.

   "they were wrong to take the law into their own hands"

   synonyms:

   illegal, unlawful, illicit, criminal, dishonest, dishonorable, corrupt

Too Much Credit Given To The Tool

We live in a reality of action and reaction; cause and effect. This leads us to misunderstand the role of tools and actions. Far too often people credit (or blame) the tool for the action rather than the actor.
Below is a retort to common situations where the tool is blamed for the effect of the action...

Nobody was killed by guns.
No houses were built by hammers.
Nobody was saved by surgery tools.
Nobody who hanged themselves was killed by a rope.

We hear these logical fallacies often: It is the President's fault, it's your fault, it's their fault, it's because of guns, it's in God's hands, it's because of  this or that.

All the while the only thing accomplished is a passing off of personal responsibility. By "personal responsibility" I don't only mean the self (although self-accountability is a form of personal responsibility), but also the blame we assign to something arbitrary to the committer of actions. For example, a great many people blame all Muslims for the acts of Islamic extremists, they blame guns for the acts of murderers, they blame the alcohol for their buffoonery, they blame the President (scapegoat/figurehead) for the effects of a broken system.

Often the person is overlooked and we search for some factor that played a part in their actions, and there are external factors, but those external factors may have different effects on different persons. We can see this in experiments where results are not conclusive.

• Some tests show that heavy metal music kills plants. Some tests show that heavy metal music helps plants grow. Heavy metal cannot be blamed entirely for bad actions.
• Some Muslims study the Koran and (along with political influences) become violently radicalized. Some Muslims study the Koran and become vessels of peace. Islam cannot be blamed entirely for bad actions.
• Some people take LSD and go insane. Some people take LSD and become enlightened. LSD cannot be blamed entirely for bad results.
• Some people use guns to commit murder. Some people use guns for self-defense, sport, or hunting. The gun cannot be blamed for it's actions or use.
• Some people eat chocolate and experience bliss. Some are allergic and almost die. Chocolate cannot be blamed entirely for death.
• Some people use a hammer to build a house. Some people use a hammer to beat someone over the head. The hammer cannot be blamed entirely for the malicious intent.
• Some people are rich and become greedy. Some people are rich and practice philanthropy and charity. The money cannot be blamed entirely for the greed of the individual.

Truthfully, we can change the battery of a car a hundred times, but that will never fix the broken transmission.

A Predicment, a Persian, but No Morbid Angel

Here is a story about one of my many interactions with Muslim people....

I have personally never had a negative experience with a Muslim person. I have encountered many over the years through daily life, wrestling life, and my cultural explorations, and I call several my friends. Yet, these days the ignorant masses try to assure us that these people are blood-thirsty monsters ready to kill us all. It simply is not true. Here's one story:

A couple of years ago I was driving from home base Austin TX to San Antonio to see a Morbid Angel concert. Just as I arrived on the outskirts of San Antonio my tire blew. No problem, I went out and did my manly deed of changing to the spare tire and continued down the road towards the concert venue. Then the old spare blew less than a mile down the road. Now I'm in a predicament, broken down on a dangerous overpass.

It was night and my phone was dying and there were no open tire places nearby. So I decided to walk to the nearest Walmart seven miles away to buy a spare so I could limp the Jeep back to Austin. At this point I had given up on my chances to get to the concert, but as luck would have it I would see Morbid Angel (with a proper musician line up) two times in the year after.

The plan was to buy a tire and take a cab back to the Jeep. The price of spare donut tires had risen considerably since I last noticed, and I spent almost all of my $100 to buy the best one that could last the trip home. I figured I could carry it the seven miles back since I had no money left for a cab.

I left the store with the tire on my left shoulder. I stood there at the parking lot curb thinking of what I could do. From my right I heard a man's voice with a Persian accent.

He said "Brother, do you need a cab?"
I replied "No thanks. I spent all my money on this tire. I can walk back to my Jeep."
"Flat tire? How far is it?" he asked.
"It's far. Just over seven miles." I answered.
He said "Pahlavan, I see your ear. I will help you. I will give you a ride for free."
("Pahlavan" is a wrestling reference in Iran that means "champion". His reference to my ear was about my cauliflower ear, which is noticeable damaged cartilage from years of wrestling. Wrestling is a national sport in Iran.)

He gave me a ride all the way back to my Jeep and wouldn't even accept the $2.37 change I had in my pocket. His kindness helped me out, and it motivated me to get my task done.

During the ride we had some light conversation.

Driver: "Where were you going in San Antonio? To see a girl?"
Me: "No. I was going to see a concert."
Driver: "Which concert?
Me: "Morbid Angel." 
Driver: "What kind of music is it?"
Me: "Heavy metal."
Driver: "Ah! Many people in my country like heavy metal!"

He dropped me off. I thanked him and he wished me well.

I put on the spare and drove 20 miles per hour on the service roads all the way back to Austin.

It was a long night for me, I missed the concert and spent many hours trying to solve the predicament, but it was made a little shorter and easier by a Muslim who treated me like a brother.

The moral lesson here about our society's general judgment about Muslims is one I had already learned, but it is worth sharing.

An Amazing Time In History

We live in an amazing time in history.
Here are a few things to consider about the time we presently live in:

• We can instantly communicate around the world through type, audio, or video in real time.
• We have virtually unlimited information available at our fingertips; the equivalent of a million libraries.
• Our governments are being exposed.
• We can quickly learn almost any skill with access to teachers and tutorials online. For example, you can learn to fix a broken table leg or cook an amazing omelet or learn a language fluently without having to go through an immersed apprenticeship. In the past one had to go to great lengths to learn to cook and other skills.
• We can interact with people of all nationalities and backgrounds. This expands our pool of knowledge and gives access to wisdom different from our own, which can exponentially expand our own knowledge and wisdom.
• In the past we only heard stories or saw pictures of our deceased relatives. We are now entering an age where we can watch video of how whole past generations lived.
• Alternative foods, building methods, energy sources, and ideas are available to us.
• Through a greater understanding of nutrition and exercise, people have the opportunity to be fitter and healthier than people in the recent past.
• The old restricting beliefs and standards of society are dying a slow death. This will allow the species to move forward.
• You can watch a nature documentary on HD TV and see a cheetah take down a gazelle. 100 years ago people only heard stories and some saw an illustration in a book of these far away mysterious creatures. Very few people ever witnessed something like this, now it is seen by millions.
• You can now learn far more at home than you ever could at a university. Autodidaction.
• We send spaceships throughout the solar system.
• Science has now proven that reality isn't reality.
• We are on the verge of discovering life on other worlds. It has already been proven mathematically.
• We have a deeper understanding of nature.
• There's a "spiritual" consciousness awakening happening around the globe that contrasts centuries of religious and political oppression.
• You have access to alternatives to the proposed status quo. You have access to alternatives to the proposed status quo. Again, you have access to alternatives to the proposed status quo.

Now what are we going to do with all of this information, capability, and potential?
You see, it turns out that it is actually YOU who is steering the ship.

The Difference Between "Legal" and "Right"

The Difference Between "Legal" and "Right"

Many (most) people in our society fall into the is/or trap. Upright apes are disoriented and choosing a side is the psychological version of holding on to a rail to not fall down, but it's only grasping for illusions.

Many people make the mistaken assumption that just because something is legal it must be right. As an example, George Zimmerman got away with murder based on a legal loophole that allows an armed person to defend themself from an unarmed attacker. However, if we take a close look at the Travon Martin killing we can easily see the logical fallacy of that law. It isn't self defense if the person you are defending yourself from is defending themself from you.

In another example, we often see the police grabbing people, and that grabbing is usually considered lawful action based on the person's reaction. But we must consider the initial action, even if it was legal, was it right? If a person is grabbed by a police officer and instinctually pulls away in self defense it is often considered "resisting arrest", but is a natural reaction an intentional resistence? Many people who have done nothing wrong get grabbed by the police, pull away instinctually, and then get arrested for "resisting arrest". It's often lawful, but it isn't always right. We must redefine the term "resisting arrest". We must also make sure that laws fulfill their purpose only. Contexts of circumstances must be considered.

Law constantly changes, and so does a society's sense of what is right. Decent conduct today may have been more or less appalling hundreds of years ago. It is important to change laws to better fit the constant changing of what is right.

"It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right."
-Henry David Thoreau

It is also true that what is illegal is not always wrong. There are many people who foolishly think that simply following the law is right. The reality is that laws are not always right, sensible, or moral. For example, marijuana use is illegal, but it isn't wrong. There are many absurd laws in effect. Each needs to be scrutinized. Every law should also come with a justification: an explanation of its purpose AND a logical explanation of its purpose within specific circumstances.

So, let's rethink and redefine the term "legal" as meaning "right", because it sometimes isn't. Right action is not always represented by law. What is right should always come before the law. Most importantly, we must not confuse what is "lawful" as always being right.

For or Against?

Hello apes!

Today I've been thinking about the things I don't like and the things I do like, and trying to keep the scales of my world tipped to the positive side.

The world is an awful place. Actually, the world is a great place, but human society is an awful place in many ways.
We want to fix the world we live in, but we do so too often by being against something we see as an injustice and it can consume our souls and rot us from the inside out. That's a case of good intentions gone bad.
Everyone knows the world is full of bad and wrong. We each do not possess some secret knowledge of this that we must spread with maniacal fervor. Bad people and wrongdoings are many and we ALL deal with it every day, but it could be better to be in support of the good more than to be against the bad. This is not to say we shouldn't spread awareness of the bad, but it can ruin our lives and happiness and it should be balanced with AT LEAST a 2:1 ratio of positive to negative. Our perpetual efforts to fix the world through being against
injustice does not spread positivity but can actually propogate more dismay. Wrongs should be righted, but mounds of right should pile high for all to see. Should the beacon of hope we set out for our fellow humans be about all that is wrong in the world, or all that there is to embrace with joy and awe?
A fire can provide warmth and light, but an out of control fire can burn the world.

So as we gain knowledge of the ills of the world, and as we spread that awareness, we must keep our eye on the main prize- happiness. We can turn the empty pits into sludge pools of anger, or we can turn them into lifegiving ponds of beauty. It's a responsibility and something to be practiced. Spread more positive perspective than negative, and the world will eventually become a more pleasant place to live in.

As an example, we have a toxic food industry. We can scream and yell about it all we want, and nothing will change. But if we switch from being less against what is wrong to more in favor of what is right, then we can change the way things are. If you promote organic farming and food and purchase organic food, and encourage others to do the same, you will create a demand that will create a change. You can see it happening already in almost any store. Organic is growing.
That's just one example of many of how we can create greater change with positive awareness rather than negative confrontation. This is not to say that we shouldn't be against the wrong, but we should be more in favor of what can be right. I can offer a middle finger as good as the next guy, but more often I try to offer a double thumbs up.

"Be careful when you fight monsters, lest you become one." -Friedrich Nietzsche

*please share this blog post by clicking one of the social media buttons below, thank you