Institution for Authority Research
Article on Diaprax
Two Roads: Didactic or Dialectic and their
To obey (or disobey) or to circumvent?—that is the question.
by Dean Gotcher
(Revised 03-08, 2009)
For an understanding of the application of diaprax, when finished with this article, read Diaprax Applied.
The battle line is between either "right and wrong" (absolute, objective truth) or "the tolerance of ambiguity" (relativism, subjective truth). Either you have no tolerance of ambiguity, "right is right and wrong is wrong," or you are tolerant of ambiguity, "there is no right or wrong answer." The school system today, which promotes a program which has no tolerance for "right and wrong (conscience)," and can only tolerate ambiguity (consensus), is producing a generation what has a paradigm of intolerance toward righteousness i.e. refusing to accept, associate with and promote those who are doing what is right and abstain from, expose, and if in a position of authority judge that which is wrong. For a believer to tolerate any deviance from "right and wrong" is to embrace confusion, the halfway house to consensus.
Your tolerance or non-tolerance of ambiguity defines your paradigm, i.e. the way you think. A non-tolerance of ambiguity paradigm is a praxis (practice or system) of a patriarchal paradigm (a "black-white," "right-wrong" way of thinking). A tolerance of ambiguity paradigm is a praxis of a heresiarchal paradigm (a "there is no right or wrong answer" way of thinking). You can only be patriarch in paradigm (obey God) or heresiarch in paradigm (discover your "human" potential, with Satan's facilitation), you can not be both patriarch and heresiarch. No matter how much the heresiarch would like you to believe otherwise, it is either one or the other. In the end there is only a patriarch paradigm, all the rest is an illusion, founded on the paradigm of deception—a shifty paradigm not a paradigm shift. The heresiarch would tell you the opposite, that the patriarchal paradigm is an illusion, willing even to give you the benefit of a doubt, for, just like yeast, a little doubt can go a long ways.
In this article, though it may be difficult to read at times, just press through. It will explain the difference between the patriarchal paradigm—where the father sets rules, the matriarchal paradigm—where the mother sets her hearts desires not upon her husband but upon herself and her children i.e. seeking justice without law (which leads to tyranny), and the heresiarchal paradigm—where the children rule (the practice of patricide and incest) i.e. tyranny.
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." Matthew 7:13, 14
If you want to know, really want to know, what is happening to the world around you, it is important to understand this battle line. It only comes down to two sides (two roads), one side (a narrow and straight road) can not tolerate (can not participate in the praxis of) ambiguity , the other side (a broad road) can not tolerate the intolerance of ambiguity. Many will think they are on the right side (road) when they are not i.e. continuing to practice tolerance of ambiguity, coming to consensus with unbelievers on spiritual matters, deceiving themselves and taking pleasure in deceiving others.
"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." 2 Corinthians 6:14-18
"The right path leads to eternal life while the wrong path leads to eternal death. Not that anyone can have eternal life from knowing about the right path. That is only possible by knowing the one who is the path, the way—Jesus Christ. "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6
"They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one." Romans 3:12
"Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." Matthew 7:14
"And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of." "Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;" "For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them." 2 Peter 2:, 2, 15, 21
"Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core." Jude 1:11
"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!" Isaiah 5: 20, 21
In the end
it was all about our fathers as seen through the eyes of children of rebellion
i.e. how to take hold of that which is of the father, without his
Paraphrase of Karl Marx's Thesis #4 by Dean Gotcher
Once our earthly father (for disobedient children the earthly father is the source of dread, the dread of chastening and alienation) is discovered to be the secret of the heavenly father (for disobedient children the heavenly father is the source of dread, the dread of chastening and alienation), the earthy father's must be eradicated, both in the thoughts and feelings of the children and in the practice of the community.
Paraphrase of Herbert Marcuse Eros and
Civilization by Dean Gotcher
In dialectical reasoning, it is not a matter whether one's father is alive or dead, what matters is, if he is still alive, he no longer demands you practice (praxis) an "Obey me and you will be blessed, disobey me and you will be cursed," "right-wrong" way of thinking—a patriarchal paradigm which carries with it the dread of chastening for those who praxis that which is wrong.
Paraphrase of Kurt
Lewin as quoted in Kenneth Benne's Human Relations in Curriculum
Change by Dean Gotcher
The dread of chastening, when one finds themselves in the presence "of a forbidden object which in itself attracts them," is usually the result of the chastening or threat of chastening of a person in authority—a father figure. If a person finds themselves in an environment where they can perceive the one in authority having no position or intent to chasten, the dread of chastening disappears, i.e. the children of rebellion are freed from any sense of guilt for their praxis.
All along there has been no other purpose but freedom from the dread of chastening i.e. for rebellious children, freedom from the author of dread, the "authoritarian" father!
Table of contents
"And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others." Ephesians 2:1-3
the "Not" (Godly restraint) to emancipate cosmic "Thought"
(The imagination of the heart, i.e. humanism).
Preface: Patricide—Negating the Patriarchal Paradigm (killing the fathers) so all the children can actualize the praxis of cosmic incest—consensus.
Two Roads: Didactic or Dialectic and their praxis: Part I
Two Roads: Didactic or Dialectic and their praxis: Part II
Some of my sources
"For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven,
the same is my brother, and sister, and mother."
The question is:
whether to obey or disobey the father, either to live according to his standards, honoring his office, preserving the "past experience" (when we received his standards) as a guide for the present and the future (faith),
or to knowingly go against his standards, still preserving the office of the father,
still preserving the "good-evil" of the "past experience" (a guilty conscience),
or whether to circumvent them both, the office of the father with his the ensuing commands and the conscience, so we can freely participation in the present, unrestrained by the "experiences of the past" (sight)—modern day therapy?
"Why are you keeping the promises you made to your father who died twenty years ago?"
paraphrase of Carl Rogers response to a women counselee.
"What does it mean to me?" replacing "What would my father say?"
It's all about the praxis:
the children's praxis and their will—there perceived purpose for themselves, with respect to the Father's praxis and his will—his revealed purpose for them,
the praxis of religion or the praxis of philosophy. Obedience and faith or questioning and doubt.
The praxis of religion is to hear and obey the Father's purpose—spiritual and revelational, transcendent of the "here-and-now."
The praxis of philosophy is to to "discover" purpose through dialogue—experiential and sensuous, unrestrained by the "there-and-then."
Man can not "discover" the Father's revealed (spiritual) purpose through human (temporal) reasoning, i.e. through opinions (reasoning based upon human senses), which requires questioning the Father's purpose,
By evaluating the Father's purpose for us through experiential and sensual perception and comparing it with a temporal praxis, negates the father's will for us.
The Father must present his purpose by revelation before man can know it and either obey it (and be blessed) or disobey it (and be cursed).
Therefore man must receive and accept the Father's purpose by faith—religion (religion i.e. obedience to the father's will—his commands—by faith, is the cause of Marx's "opiate")—"opiate" being the praxis of evaluating temporal things (human behavior) through spiritual eyes and spiritual ears. Either man will receive the Father's purpose through faith in the Fathers revealed will or else he will question the Father's purpose to "discover" his own purpose through human reasoning—philosophy, opinions—evaluating spiritual things through temporal eyes and temporal ears—"having eyes which are human eyes, and ears which are human ears" Karl Marx.
Either we open up God's Word and evaluate it from our life experiences and change it, so we can feel better about ourselves and be less offensive to others or else we open up God's Word and evaluate our life experiences from it and let it change us, so we might know, obey, and serve him.
"Having eyes, see ye not? and having ears, hear
ye not? and do ye not remember?" Mark 8:18
"And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." Matthew 13:14, 15
"Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye." Acts 7:51
"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." Colossians 2:8
"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever." 1 John 2:15-18
"For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ." 1 Corinthians 2:11-16
“Philosophy as theory . . . establishes the basis of its reality as praxis; it serves to distinguish it from religion, the wisdom of the other world.” Karl Marx
“Philosophy is not outside the world; it simply has a different kind of presence in the world. The world is its ground; it is the spiritual quintessence of its age. The world is the object of its enquiry and concern.; it is the wisdom of the world.” Joseph O'Malley (ed.) Karl Marx Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right'
“Philosophy as praxis is the activity of informed criticism.” ibid
“Doubt [in the father and his standards, his way, in revelation] is the starting point of modern philosophy.” Erich Fromm
Creating an "oughty" environment.
“In short, philosophy as theory finds the
‘ought’ implied within the ‘is’, and as praxis seeks to make the two
Joseph O'Malley (ed.) Karl Marx Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right'
The 'ought' is "If I had the power and authority to subdue you so I could will (live) my life my way, I would do it—my way." 'Ought' is desire (lust, "felt" needs) seeking freedom of expression, still under the fear (dread) of judgment/punishment (in a state of anxiety). The 'is' is "You will do it my way because I say so." 'Is' is purpose expecting recognition and honour. Both are 'I will.' The difference being, the 'is,' has power, has authority, is established ("I Am"), tying the present to the past and the future (commands and consequence), the 'there-and-then,' i.e. objective thinking, while the 'ought' is powerless, unestablished (a non-actualized "I will"), still in an "I feel" sulking state, not aware of or possessed by an "I think," self justifying (actualizing) state, not yet intellectualized, educated, not yet able to tie the present to the present and the future (desires and possibilities, "Feelings with thoughts"), the "ought" is the 'here-and-now' in waiting, self awaiting actualization i.e. subjective thinking, the "ought" is pent up rebellion seeking manifestation (revolution is materialized rebellion).
The 'ought' is a timid, weak, suppressed 'I will' of the present desires, an uneducated "I will," a changing, 'living will,' based upon the desires of the recipient in the moment—the future is not obligated or restrained by the voice of the past but instead it is being influenced by the sensual (sensuous) voices of the current cosmic environment. The 'is' is the 'I will" of the past, an established will based upon the benefactors conditions, shaping the recipients behavior in the present, to be actualized by the recipient only after the benefactors passing—the present and the future desires are restrained by the voice of the past, obligated to the demands of the past. The objective of the dialectical process is to make all wills subjective, guided by the common interest, common desires, of all parties in the present, not just determined by the one with property, seen as "surplus repression", limiting its distribution based upon the property owners particular guidelines, their definition of proper behavior.
"Thinking through the process it is dialectically faulty to start with the negative, with anxiety. The problem is to name the dynamic factor provoking anxiety to emerge [the "intrusive" command of the father]. Anxiety is a function of spontaneity. Spontaneity can be defined as the adequate response to a new situation, or the novel response to an old situation. With decrease of spontaneity anxiety increases. With entire lose of spontaneity anxiety reaches its maximum, the point of panic." J. L. Moreno Who Shall Survive
The key to understanding this dialectical formula is the removal (the negation) of the word 'Not,' "the dynamic factor provoking anxiety to emerge." 'Not' offers only the choice of 'obey' or 'disobey.' Its exclusion in problem solving allows discourse. Dialogue is the pathway toward "rational" compromise, of change "justified"—differences mediated. 'Not,' the "negative" voice of restraint, the voice of the authority of the father expecting to being honored, removed from the room, allows the 'ought,' the "positive" internal voice seeking liberation, self seeking the openness of "spontaneity," the voice of the authorization of the self being esteemed (lust), freedom of discourse, which in turn liberates the freedom of thought (the land of theory, the world of "seem to"). The "is-ought" heresiarchal praxis, a worldly paradigm (human way of thinking), negates an "is-not" patriarchal praxis, a Godly paradigm (Biblical way of thinking), instantly. The very act of participation produces spiritual death.
"From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God. Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy? But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up." James 4: 1-10
Put another way, 'is' (the office of authority) with a 'Not' (command limiting natural inclination, spontaneity repressed) is a patriarchal praxis—a purpose directed life, led by God's desire, by his word and by his spirit, to bring us into right relationship (atonement) with him, authority defines proper behavior for those under their rule i.e. what is right behavior and what is not, in regards to relationship with people or things in the present and future (not yet experienced) environment—obedience to commands given from someone above current common "felt" needs. 'Is' (the office of authority) with an 'ought' (natural inclination, spontaneity) is a heresiarchal praxis—a purpose driven life, led by human desires, by human nature, to relate with someone or something within the natural universe, authority discovers "proper" behavior common with their own desires and desires of others i.e. what is right behavior and what is not, in regards to relationship with people or things in the present, based upon finding common ground with the current and future (potential) environment—questioning, through dialogue, any command which interferes with the actualization of common "felt" needs. Therefore, "is" driven by "ought," (the office of authority driven by the spontaneity of common "felt" needs) negates the office of the father (the patriarchal paradigm, the office of authority directing the person to take control over the spontaneity of human nature, of common "felt" needs) with its restraining 'Not.'
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." John 3:16-21
Jesus did not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it. (John 5:19) He obeyed his Fathers will, redeeming us from the wrath of the law. (Romans 5:8-6:18) Thus his patriarchal praxis, in relationship with his patriarchal Father, can become our patriarchal praxis, in relationship with his patriarchal Father. Through his shed blood and the power of the Holy Spirit (through baptism in water and in his Spirit), all patriarchal in praxis, the only begotten Son and the Holy Spirit were both sent by the Father for us. In Christ Jesus we have become children of God (not in flesh but in spirit), joint heirs through him, in his praxis, and with him, in his praxis. Jesus never praxised an ought, and has never asked anyone to do so. To praxis an ought defeats our true purpose, given to us by a holy, pure, and righteous God, to be as Jesus, to be an obedient child. The law externally imposed is the law without Christ Jesus. In Christ the law becomes internally expressed through work of the Holy Spirit. Without the recognition of our wickedness, the works of the flesh and our mind subject to its will, and Gods judgment upon wickedness we would not recognize the necessity of the work of Christ, His life, His death, and His resurrection, all done according to the will for our Heavenly Father, "thy will be done," for our redemption, that we might have eternal life "enter into the kingdom of heaven" instead of death "cast into hell," "everlasting punishment" Matthew 5:46
"And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:2-4
It was the Fathers will to send his only begotten son, Jesus Christ, to redeem us from our sin, our separation from him, our "shifty" paradigm (so called paradigm shift) of self-determination and self-deception (Mark 2:17). It was the Fathers will to send his Holy Spirit to teach us and to guide us into all truth and righteousness. Thus we might perceive the fathers commands being of the past, from the law and the prophets, which we can not accomplish in ourselves, while in truth his law is now in the present, through the work of the Holy Spirit, in us. When we walk and live in the spirit, setting our minds on things above, His Spirit bearing witness with our spirit, we fulfill his will, being obedient children. "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint–heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together." Romans 8:16, 17 There is no 'ought' in his Spirit, only a 'must.' The suffering comes from our refusal to praxis the law of the flesh, from not setting our mind on the things of the earth with its "felt" needs, its human desires, with its 'ought's.' The suffering comes from our refusal to praxis consensus, the dialectical, diabolical, deadly "game" of philosophy and change—'theory and practice'—whose foundation is built upon human nature and human reasoning.
“…philosophy as struggle with error and superstition is also and always enlightenment.” Bronner
“In direct contrast to German philosophy, which
descends from heaven to earth, here we ascend from earth to heaven.”
Marx attempted to de-mythologize—materialize—George Hegel. Demythologized Gnosticism, Cabalism, Hermeticism, etc. is dialectical materialism.
"The head of the emancipation of man [from having to obey a father's commands] is philosophy." Karl Marx
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life:
no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my father which is in heaven." Matthew 7:21
"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9
"I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:" Deuteronomy 30:19
"Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; a blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day: and a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known." Deuteronomy 11:26-28
"But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites; Of the nations concerning which the LORD said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love."
"For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the LORD his God, as was the heart of David his father."
"Wherefore the LORD said unto Solomon, Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant." I Kings 10: 1-2, 4, 11
"‘It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one’s father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same.” (Herbert Marcuse Eros and Civilization, 1955 quoting Sigmund Freud)
It's not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or he is still around as long as his "Obey me or else ..., because I say so." is circumvented (the dread of chastening is silenced) through the praxis of consensus.
In dialectical reasoning, it is not a matter whether one's father is alive or dead, what matters is there is no one who demands you practice (praxis) an "Obey me and you will be blessed, disobey me and you will be cursed." way of thinking—a patriarchal paradigm. What matter is there is no one around who will chasten you for disobeying rules they, like God, have arbitrarily established, rules which make no sense to you—non-sensuous, rules you can not experientially comprehend, rules which block normal human behavior (for "Boys will be boys."), intolerant rules which prevent the praxis of an "I'm OK. Your OK." "Can't we all just get along." "If it feels good, just do it." outcome—a heresiarchal paradigm i.e. postmodernism, where there are supposedly no fixed laws.
If the conscience is the outcome of a "thesis-antithesis" environment, and if consensus is the outcome of an "emerging synthesis" environment, then a person with a conscience will be perceived as cacophonous (out of harmony) in an environment of consensus.
Dean Gotcher Social health through consensus
“Some of the formal properties of religion, such as the rigid antithesis of good and evil, … still exercise considerable power.” Theodor Adorno The Authoritarian Personality
“We don’t know the answers to the question: What proportion of the population is irreversibly authoritarian?” Abraham Maslow Maslow on Management
Dialectic is deviancy in unity without sacrificing deviancy. Thus deviancy becomes the norm
Consensus is deviancy in unity without sacrificing deviancy. Thus deviancy becomes the norm
Conscience is "the key element" of self-control, "refraining from deviant behavior." (Trojanowicz)
"But life at its best is a creative synthesis of opposites in fruitful harmony. The philosopher Hegel said that truth is found in neither the thesis nor the antithesis, but in an emergent synthesis which reconciles the two…. Jesus recognized the need for blending opposites." Martin Luther King Jr. Strength to Love, sermon “A Tough Mind and a Tender Heart.”
In dialectical "logic" since "truth is found in the emerging synthesis" and "not found in the thesis nor the antithesis" (Martin Luther King, Jr., Strength to Love), since truth is not found in whether dad's command is right or wrong, since truth is not found in any pre-determined "good-evil," "right-wrong," "obey or else" command, since truth is not established without our "enlightened" consent, then it is everybody's responsibility in the "village" to either convert the father, (help him see the error of his way and change), or remove him from his children (or remove his children from him), or kill him i.e. remove him from the village. The first choice is to convert him: to neuter him; to sanitize him, his home, and "the village" of his patriarchal praxis, to make the village—its businesses, its government, its education system, its "churches," etc.—socially healthy i.e. germ free. “Individuals move not from a fixity through change to a new fixity, though such a process is indeed possible. But [through a] continuum from fixity to changingness, from rigid structure to flow, from stasis to process.” Carl Rogers On Becoming a Person
“Prior to therapy the person is prone to ask himself ‘What would my parents want me to do?’ During the process of therapy the individual comes to ask himself ‘What does it mean to me?’” (Rogers)
“We will know that our knowledge of the authoritarian character structure is truly scientific when an average authoritarian character will be able to read the information on the subject and the regard his own authoritarian character as undesirable or sick or pathological and will go about trying to get rid of it.” Abraham Maslow Maslow on Management
The seekers of "sensuous truth"
“... planned change which is consistent with
democratic ideology ... must develop persons who see non-influencability
of private convictions in joint deliberations as a vice rather than a
Kenneth Benne Human Relations in Curriculum Change
Since, according to dialectical "reasoning," "truth is not found in the thesis nor the antithesis" (God's commands, whether their outcome is right or not in light of the given situation) but instead "is found in the emerging synthesis," (how man feels and what he thinks concerning his "felt" needs) (King), since truth is found in the experience (praxis) of seeking and discovering common ground, since truth is actualized through discourse and not found in any unchangeable law, laws established outside of the common human experience of the moment, contrasting things below (common human experience) from things above (out of reach of common human experience), then every effort should be made to facilitate his conversion through the praxis of consensus building. (Note: Dialectical "reasoning" is similar to Hermeticism: "That which is Below corresponds to that which is Above, and that which is Above, corresponds to that which is Below, to accomplish the miracles of the One Thing." The Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus, translated by Dennis W. Hauck. This "As above, so below" dialectical philo-religion is occult: "the Hermetic tradition was both moderate and flexible, offering a tolerant philosophical religion, a religion of the (omnipresent) mind, a purified perception of God, the cosmos, and the self, and much positive encouragement for the spiritual seeker, all of which the student could take anywhere." Tobias Churton The Golden Builders: Alchemists, Rosicrucians, and the First Freemasons.) This is the praxis of transformation, i.e. the praxis of alignment, through role-playing, with "cosmic energy." The occult phrase "As above, so below" (common) is used in place of "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." (contrast) Matthew 6:10 (KJV) by Eugene Peterson's in his Hermetic based "bible," The Message. The apostate church is built on dialectically "reasoned," occult books like Peterson's, i.e. Church Growth, Emerging Church.
"... personalistic philosophy – the theory that the clue to the meaning of ultimate reality is found in personality. This personal idealism remains today my basic philosophical position…it gave me a metaphysical and philosophical grounding for the idea of a personal God, and it gave me a metaphysical basis for the dignity and worth of all human personality." Martin Luther King Jr. Stride Toward Freedom The Montgomery Story (New York: Harper, 1958 p. 100)
If he refuses to convert to a dialectical praxis, he is identified as a resister to change and must be neutralized. This is achieved by getting everybody's input, including his own, in making a decision, making laws flexible to the "times," “Laws ...must change as ... the people change.” (Karl Marx Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right). This frees others from his rigid patriarchal paradigm, and begins the praxis of circumvention.
This is comparable to silencing a singer by letting him sing, all he wants, next to a noisy jet engine, no one is telling him he "can not" sing, no one is overtly putting him down. He is being "encouraged" to abdicate the "attitude" of having it "his way." He is being conditioned to listen to the "feelings" and "thoughts" of others, he is being conditioned to not base other's singing (noise) upon his "right-wrong" way of singing. “Consciousness, instead of being the watchman over a dangerous and unpredictable lot of impulses, becomes the comfortable inhabitant of a society of impulses and feelings and thoughts.” (Rogers) He is learning to say "I feel annoyed by what you are doing," rather than, "What you are doing is all wrong." Like Pavlov's dogs, when conditioned to social noise, people will perform proper social behavior when the bell (sound bite of social noise) is rung. Truth, according to the dialectical paradigm, is to be found in the noise of social change (man's feelings and thoughts, his opinions) and not in any predetermined arbitrary law, laws established outside of the common human comprehension or experience of the "here-and-now."
"changing truth" vs. listing for Truth:
a short audio of Shirley McCune
If he continues on insisting in his way, the use of his paradigm, (do you understand it is not the information he is sharing, it is the paradigm he is using) then, as his friends and associates become converted, they become tolerant of ambiguity*, tolerable of social "noise"—“In this process the individual becomes more open to his experience. It is the opposite of defensiveness or rigidity. His beliefs are not rigid, he can tolerate ambiguity.” Carl Rogers On Becoming A Person "Once a member realizes that others [the group, the village] accept him and are trying to understand him, then he finds it less necessary to hold rigidly to his own beliefs; and he may be willing to explore previously denied aspects of himself [i.e. open to his homosexual nature]." (Yalom)—he will be marginalized (shunned—recognized as not worthy of being listening to) he will be shamed (Jesus "despised" the shame of the cross, Hebrews 12:2 Shaming is a people thing). This happens when his "friends" realize their association with him jeopardizes their approval by others and endangers their future interests, interests which depend upon village association—the respect of men.
*The word "ambiguous" is used in place of the word homosexual by Charles Fourier who "ennobled and sanctified all sexual acts, including those he termed ‘ambiguous’ [i.e. homosexual].” See Daniel Guerin Homosexualité et Révolution, p.15; "The dialectical relation to be established between homosexuality and the words Revolution." [The major and last obstacle to overcome is] "the bourgeois based upon the family." Guerin also authored Anarchism: From Theory to Practice and No Gods No Masters: An Anthology of Anarchism; his work is all about a borderless society—mentally, emotionally, physically, and socially, i.e. the working class and homosexuality. Abraham Maslow, who worked closely with Rogers, wrote in his journal about his experimentation in homosexuality, stating he was still old fashioned and was going slow in that direction. While scriptures of a strong patriarchal nature are now being marked as statements of "hate," people using them in some lands being reprimanded, those of the dialectical paradigm can express their hate of those with a patriarchal paradigm, calling them "homophobes," without being reprimanded. Freedom of speech in a dialectical worlds always censors didactic speech, in the name of tolerance. Even those who expose such abnormality of thinking are in danger of being expurgated by those who supposedly resent censorship.
After all this effort is spent on him, to help him see the "error of his way" (refusing to recognize that he was "into denial"), if he persists in the praxis of a patriarchal paradigm, he will be removed from occupying any position of power or participating in any situation of influence—"killed"—by the ruck—the "family" and the community—patricide. Since all in the neighborhood, in the workplace, in the "church," etc. have succumbed to the paradigm which believes that "It takes a village to raise the family," he will become isolated—his camaraderie with those around him will cease to exist. He will learn that his worth is based upon his participation with the "village," and no longer based upon a voice higher than the human cause. Of course, "the village" will do this out of a "caring heart," for everyone's "good," including his.
"It is important that the therapist attempt to screen out patients who will become marked deviants, deviants because of their interpersonal behavior in the group sessions and not because of a deviant life style or past history." "There is no type of past behavior too deviant for a group to accept once therapeutic group norms are established.… the patient with a homosexual orientation often adds breadth and depth to the group." "... the deviant … correlates very highly with negative outcome: a member deemed by the others … to be ‘out’ of the group has virtually no chance of benefiting from the group and a strong chance of suffering harm." "The successful leader … reinforces each member’s activity … escort the deviant back into the group, and he discourages the development of scapegoating and judgmentalism." "One of the most difficult patients for me to work with in groups is the individual who employs fundamentalist religious views in the service of denial." "Communication toward a deviant is very great initially and then drops off sharply as the group rejects the deviant. Eventually, the group will extrude the deviant. They may smile at one another when he speaks or behaves irrelevantly; they will mascot him, they will ignore him rather than invest the necessary time to understand his interventions." (Irvin Yalom Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)
If our perception of the environment (sight) tells us that everyone is doing it, then it is easier for us to justify (through human reasoning) our participation—consensus (sensuous truth).
"For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise." II Corinthians 10:12
"(For we walk by faith, not by sight:)" II Corinthians 5:7
"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17
"But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Hebrews 11:6
"Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." John 12:42, 43
The object is not the father's removal, it is the annihilation of his biblically based—above human—patriarchal paradigm, his superfluous way of thinking—thinking that he must be above, and below, someone, that someone must obey his commands, that he must rule (a command from God), that his wife must submit to his rule (a command from God), and that his children must obey his commands, "in the Lord," (a command from God)—all under a Heavenly Father and his commands: Ephesians chapters 5-6. In the church the emphasis has shifted from preaching and teaching the word of God, evaluating our lives from the light of God's word, to discourse and sharing in the evaluation of God's word, in the "light" of our lives, our common "felt" needs. Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud both believed that to negate the Heavenly Father, the earthly father must first be negated. The agenda was to shift our focus from commands to be obeyed, deductively, toward desires to be experienced, inductively. Therefore, according to dialectical thinking, "‘It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one’s father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same.” (Freud quoted by Marcuse)
the dialectical tension between faith and reason, the father and one's own experience
“He [Martin Luther King Jr.] would want someone to express as radical a view as possible and someone to express as conservative view as possible. We kind of did this sort of like a game and it almost always fell to my lot to express the conservative view….He figured…the wider variety of opinions you got, the better chance you had of extracting the truth from that.” David J. Garrow Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King Jr., and the South Christian Leadership Conference (New York: W. Morrow, 1986)
"Evil in the world will not be eradicated through human effort or divine intervention alone, but through human effort and divine power." paraphrase of Martin Luther King Jr. Strength to Love pp. 127-136 by George Russell Seay, Jr. THEOLOGIAN OF SYNTHESIS: THE DIALECTICAL METHOD OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. AS REVEALED IN HIS CRITICAL THINKING ON THEOLOGY, HISTORY, AND ETHICS (Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Vanderbilt University In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Religion December 2008)
“the search for God is ... a process.” King, “Qualifying Examination Answers, Systematic Theology,” Papers, 2: 231.
Democratic socialism; “The good and just society is neither the thesis of capitalism nor the antithesis of Communism, but a socially conscious democracy which reconciles the truths of individualism [Capitalism] and collectivism [Communism].” Martin Luther King Jr. Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community? New York: Bantam, 1968.
In consensus there is no father figure (and thus no objective truth), only an altered state of fatherhood (corrupted) which exists (is experienced) in the role of a facilitator. "…the therapist is the living personification of all parental images, Group therapists refuse to fill the traditional authority role: they do not lead in the ordinary manner, they do not provide answers and solutions, they urge the group to explore and to employ its own resources. [It is] essential … that the group feel free to confront the therapist, who must not only permit, but encourage, such confrontation." (Yalom)
In a patriarchal praxis standards are established above man's common experience and temporal comprehension, by God; standards are established above a child's common experience and comprehension (at least at the time), by parents.
"For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."
"Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother." I John 3:7-20
"Sin" in a dialectical (heresiarchal) paradigm is different than sin in a didactical (patriarchal) paradigm. In the patriarchal paradigm "Sin is the estrangement of man from God." "And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, ..." Colossians 1:21-24 In the dialectical paradigm “‘Sin’ is the estrangement of man from man.” (Leonard Wheat Paul Tillich's Dialectical Humanism) "Estrangement," according to those pushing this paradigm, is caused by the “status‑anxiety [patriarchal authority structure] so often found in families of prejudiced subjects [people with fixed positions and values given to them by a higher authority, those who accept a hierarchy system and its values as given and live by its definitions and expect others to abide within it boundaries]" and "is reflected in the adoption of a rigid and externalized set of values [quoting scriptures, bible" thumpers," fundamental religious believers-extremists—a person willing to loose his promotion, even his joblife, over an non-experienced (undiscovered) truth.]:” (Adorno) "But Brown (Life Against Death) believed that the payoff was worth the price of sin [freedom from the patriarchal paradigm by the act of killing the patriarch, in the persons thoughts—in his mind, and in the community he lives in—in society]--namely, that alienation would be overcome, and the return of the repressed completed, rendering problems of sin permanently moot. (Mike Connor. From the March 23-30, 2005 issue of Metro Santa Cruz)
"… a scientifically [dialectically] acceptable solution does exist … For to accept that solution, even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [observing the world from the children's world view which effectively negates the parent's office, have's and have-not's synthesized] other than that of the bourgeoisie ["This is mine and not yours." "I can and you can not," "I am right and you are wrong"]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely." "... as soon as the bourgeoisie [the parent] is forced to take up its stand on this terrain [in the children's experiential environment with dialogue, tolerant of ambiguity], it is lost." György Lukács History & Class Consciousness Class Consciousness March, 1920
In other words, the moment the patriarch, the father, is "forced to take up [his] stand on [the] terrain" of dialogue with his child—forced internally, to keep the feeling of approval (love) of the child and forced externally, to keep the feeling of approval (love) of the village—forced to keep human relationship, forced by the fear of losing respect in the eyes of others ("Can't you feel the love."), the parent immediately loses (abdicates) his office of authority given to him by God. "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers [the Greek word used here is exousia (εξουσία), meaning authority, not dunamis (δύναμις), meaning power. Exousia is an office given by God, and not found in a man. The office of authority (εξουσία) is from God, even though the power (δύναμις), the sword, might be in the hand of the man, i.e. a tyrant is a man who uses his δύναμις of the sword while in the office of εξουσία, given by God, for his own personal gain. You do not have to obey the tyrant (you will suffer for that), but you need to recognize and honour the office.]. For there is no εξουσία but of God: the εξουσίαs that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the εξουσία, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation." Romans 13:1, 2 The dialectical process is the negating the εξουσία of the father and replacing it with the δύναμις of carnal man—democracy is the tyranny of the masses, where the carnal δύναμις of man is rushing to overthrow the εξουσία of God. It's like standing in front of an avalanche. In this case it is a mass of unstable people moving in the same direction. Without the patriarchal paradigm, we are now "willingly" living in tyranny, both in mind and in action—"All δύναμις to the people." Everyone's thoughts and behavior are now being assessed, based upon their participating in finding immediate "felt" needs and fulfilling them in the "light" to the world at hand. "May the force be with you" has replaced "May God be with you." "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." II John 1:9-11
"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." I Corinthians 15:19
Immanuel Kant believed the purpose of life, the hope of life, is based in happiness, which is pleasure. If in this life only, we have hope, he would be right, but that would not be hope. That kind of "hope" is hopelessness; it would be hopefulness without hope, a sensation of hope without the promise. "The ability to promise involves the loss of the natural animal forgetfulness of the past, which is the precondition for healthy living in the present. Through the ability to promise, the future is bound to the past." (Brown) But my hope is found on nothing less than in Jesus' blood and righteousness.
"Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation [dialogue] received by tradition from your fathers [carnal fathers]; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God." I Peter 1:18-21 "Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost." Romans 15:13 "And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it." Romans 8:23-25
According to dialectical "logic," only when the patriarch is "killed" or abdicates his God given office, allowing himself to be brought "into captivity to the law of sin which is in [his] members," choosing the pathway of "the flesh,"—"the law of sin," (like Adam did in the Garden in Eden)—choosing human relationship with Eve (Genesis 3:17) rather than obedience to God (Romans 5:19), forsaking the didactic way of thinking (paradigm) of "right-wrong," "good-evil," then and only then can there be "equality of opportunity" to praxis Eros in the home and in society. "For equality of opportunity to exist [in the home and in society] the family as a unit must be weakened." (James Coleman The Adolescent Society) When the father is silenced (removed from the family or killed) or, if still present, he willingly forsakes his office as the patriarch, the head of the family, or keeps it in name only, then the patriarchal family is moribund, and the heresiarchal "family" (the village) takes his place. “Any non-family-based collectivity that intervenes between parent and child and attempts to regulate and modify the parent-child relationship will have a democratizing impact on that relationship regardless of its intent.... once the parent can in any way imagine his own orientation to be a possible liability to the child in the world approaching, the authoritarian family is moribund, regardless of whatever countermeasures may be taken." (Warren Bennis The Temporary Society) "Confronted with the rigidity of the adult, one turns naturally to the question of whether the prospects for healthy personality structure would not be greater if the proper influences were brought to bear earlier in the individuals life, . . .” (Adorno)
It is no joke, it is the purpose in "purpose driven." After all the story writers have written and all the philosophers have philosophized, and all the interpreters have interpreted, and all the facilitators have facilitated, it is all about "de-ceit." And deceit is subtle. And deceit is winning. That is until our Heavenly Father takes care of it in the end.
Two Roads: Didactic or Dialectic and their praxis: Part I
To obey (disobey) or to circumvent?—that is the question.
by Dean Gotcher
After reading this article on the choice between truth or theory, read how and where Diaprax is applied.
All [ brackets ] below mean emphasis, quotations, or information has been added within a quotation.
Two Roads: Didactic or Dialectic and their praxis: Part I
The "logic" of "Sensitivity Training:" dialectical "logic"
The de-formation of civilization according to Freud
The nature of man according to Freud
The re-formation of civilization (replacing conscience with consensus)
The taxonomies of change: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor
If E ≈ p, and if p ≈ v&b, then E ≈ v&b
Tie God to your sensuousness and before long you serve a sensuous god.
"Child" labor laws and works salvation
The Synergy of Eros and the Eros of Synergy
'purposiveness without purpose' 'lawfulness without law'
Feuerbach Thesis #1 Karl Marx
The life which he has given
"The transformation of the family's role"
Two Roads: Didactic or Dialectic and their praxis: Part II
Some of my sources
The "logic" of "Sensitivity Training"
Our present culture is being re-designed from the following "logic." This "logic" is a way of thinking. A way of thinking which is cunning. It is troublesome to recognize and exhausting to understand, that is, until it is exposed by the light of the word of God. Then it will be revealed that this way of thinking (dialectical paradigm) is perverse, that it is diabolical, that it is wicked, that it is ruthless (Genesis 19:9). Both ways of thought (didactic-patriarchal and dialectic-heresiarchal paradigms) will be presented in the following article. Then it will be clear why and how we have become a wicked nation promoting wickedness as the way of life. I will start with a quotation by Herbert Marcuse, the man many of our influential "leaders" have shaped their minds around.
“If the guilt accumulated in the civilized domination of man by man can ever be redeemed by freedom, then the ‘original sin’ must be committed again: ‘We must again eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence." (Marcuse)
“What the great world needs, of course, is a little more Eros and less strife. . . . [i.e.] dialectical dreamers.”
(Norman O. Brown Life Against Death)
The de-formation of civilization according to Freud (the conscience)
Marcuse, a member of the Marxist organization "The Institution of Social Research" (informally known as the "Frankfurt School"), believed that Freud and Marx were on the same page when it came to the dialectical process. While Marx saw the resolution to the dialectical rift between man and society through the use of violent "revolution," Freud could not accept this outcome. Freud could not reconcile himself to what he called the "exploding" of civilization. He, according to Marcuse, believed that the dialectical "neurosis" of civilization was the result of a patriarchal paradigm (the father figure)—"neurosis" equated to the fear of the father figure, the fear of God. A paradigm, according to Freud, which was established in the first tribe (a "primal horde"), with its patriarch, his wife, and their children. He believed the children desired to have sexual relations with the wife of the patriarch and with one another—incest. "Freud noted that … patricide and incest … are part of man’s deepest nature." (Yalom) It is important to know that Freud believed all children were sexually active. He believed all the senses—touch, taste, sight, smell, sound—were a part of the sex act ("pleasure principle"), whether conception (procreation—"reality principle") was intended, or possible or not. The objective of sex was pleasure, not procreation. Procreation was simply a byproduct, wanted or unwanted, of the quest for pleasure (Eros.) The "logical outgrowth" of Freud's scenario is "justified" homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality, pornography, incest, etc. as well as patricide—"Vatermord" i.e. murder of the father.
“Emancipation lies in fantasy and the language of experience irreducible to linguistic rules: mimesis. . . . Marcuse thus could write that ‘the realm of freedom lies beyond mimesis.’”
Stephen Erik Bronner Of Critical Theory and its Theorists
“Universal Reconciliation relies on a reason that is before reason-mimesis or ‘impulse.’”
Jürgen Habermas The Theory of Communicative Action
“Impulse, the primary fact, back of which, psychically we cannot go.”
John Dewey, “Social Psychology,” Psychological Review, I (July, 1894), p. 404
The incest-patricide dialectical praxis is bases upon mimesis (subconscious sensuous experience actualized, internal "reality" imitated, externalized, and realized) and caprice (an un-meditated expression of subconscious desire) on the one hand and the reaction (resentment) toward any object which interferes with their realization on the other i.e. resisters to change. Since the dark side of Eros, the "death instinct" is hindered by the desire to stay alive and enjoy pleasure, the '"life instinct" (the father is more powerful than the child and can destroy him), collective power is necessary to overcome the patriarch and the fear of him (the source of the fear of death—physical, mental, and especially social)—the conscience. If all kill the father, in the quest for common pleasure, then the deed is socially "justified" and the individual conscience is not awakened. It is this pathway, this orgiastic, Dionysian, dialectical praxis, where "life" and "death" (both sides of Eros) are united in the moment, which some are proactively pushing into our culture. It is their "purpose," to legalize, through consensus, this abominable dialectical praxis in our homes, neighborhoods, cities, counties, states, and nation. Example: "The great utopian [Fourier] wants to see no form of attraction repressed for, an ancestor of Freud, he is too well aware of the psychological damage done by the constriction of the instincts and how unhappy we are when we are struggling against ourselves. Even more serious than the individual suffering caused by the repression of the passions are the effects on society. If they are held in check, they immediately reappear in a more harmful form which Fourier called 'recurrent', and it is then and only then that they create disorder : 'Any dammed up passion produces its counter-passion which is as harmful as the natural passion would have been beneficial.'" Daniel Guerin ‘Le nouveau monde amoureux de Fourier’ in Arcadie nos. 168 & 169 (1967 & 1968), pp.554-60 & 16-23, quote p.554.
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12
"polymorphously perverse" praxis
"reach out and touch"
Pleasure (touch, taste, sight, smell, sound) of the organs associated with procreation without the intent or possibility of procreation (outside the husband-wife relationship) "justifies," in the eyes of dialectical man, homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality, incest, pornography, etc.
According to Freud, because of the sensuous behavior of the children, in relation to his wife, the patriarch drove the "polymorphically perverse" children out of the tribe. The outcast children regrouped, swore consensus, then got some of the children still in the tribe to join with them and killed the patriarch (reminiscent of the French Revolution). "One day, the brothers who had been driven out came together, killed and devoured their father and so made an end of the patriarchal horde" ( Freud, Totem and taboo 1912-1913a, p. 141). This fictitious story becomes the main source for human guilt and is thus the foundation upon which psychoanalysis is "justified." The act of parricide, the killing of ones father becomes in social context patricide, the killing of ones king—the king may not be perfect but God is (it is important to know God was disappointed with Israel for wanting a King i.e. rejecting faith in Him 1 Samuel 8:7). Both unite upon the intent and praxis of the "negation of the negation" of the patriarchal paradigm as well as the patriarch himself, be he head of the family, head of the nation, or, the original intent, God himself.
"We must return to Freud and say that incest guilt created the familial organization." (Brown)
Then, according to this neo-Gnostic fable, the children, out of a guilty conscience, restored the patriarchal paradigm back over the tribe, (setting laws of restraint above nature, reestablishing order above change, conscience above Eros, supernatural life above natural life, denying self above esteeming self, the law of God—the father figure—above the the law of the flesh, Rex above Lex, etc), to protect the tribe from an orgiastic, Dionysian, Eros death i.e. from anarchy, from "exploding"). Except, this time, instead of the purpose in life being established in and by one figure, it became the social standard established by a privileged few at the top for all below them to obey, who saw it as their duty, as a father figure, a patriarch, "to serve and to protect" the natural resources i.e. the father's wife, the children's mother, from the excess of the rest of the children, thus forming civilization as it is known today. Therefore a few at the top, who owned private property, could keep the rest of the family (the rest of mankind) from having sexual relations, sensuous pleasure, with the mother while they themselves enjoyed the "pleasures of life." The "have" above the "have nots" was reestablished and sustained for the sake of preserving civilization and order. This becomes the dichotomy upon which the dialectical praxis justifies itself in the annihilation of nationalism, racism, feminism, sexism i.e. anti-homosexuality, with its ultimate agenda of negating God over man, i.e. parents over children—a patriarchal paradigm.
"To serve and to protect"
in the patriarchal paradigm,
property (natural resource) is under the control of a patriarch, therefore
private property is the immanent domain of the patriarch, justified and supported by his will and force.
"To serve and to protect" in the heresiarchal paradigm,
all property (natural resource) is under the control of "the village," "the brotherhood", therefore
all property is the immanent domain of the "village," justified and supported by its will and force.
Again: According to Freud, those on top "justified" their use of the patriarchal paradigm as their responsibility "to serve and to protect" the tribe, just as the original patriarch had done. Therein lay the separation of resources between the private and the public sectors of society, a few private citizens controlling the resources of the general public, producing a civilization with the haves and the have-nots (God insisting the Garden in Eden was his and not Adam's and Eve's, driving them off his property when they set aside his laws of restraint. Adam and Eve claiming the garden, the natural resources, as theirs, making themselves equal with God when they did not abide by his non-sensuous patriarchal paradigm of obedience, and instead dialectically justified it as theirs, as at one with them). “... the modifications and deflections of instinctual energy necessitated by the perpetuation of the monogamic-patriarchal family, or by a hierarchical division of labor, or by public control of the individuals private existence are instances of surplus- repression ..." (Marcuse)
If private property, if the Garden in Eden, could be gained back to mankind, without restraint on Eros, if the patriarchal office could be removed or abandon, surplus repression (possession laws restraining Eros) would be negated, and mankind would be free to be himself again, to enjoy the uniting of his nature with nature, to unite his Eros with the Eros of nature, to enjoy the pleasures of nature with all of mankind—"World Peace"—a world without "violence," a world of "trust." A world in which all mankind can make inquiry into all things, like Eve did in the Garden in Eden, but this time without restraint, a time when and a place where all can 'discover' truth without fear of a violent reprimand, without experiencing physical, mental, and social violence.
Turning "good into evil and evil into good," violence is now defined as any praxis which judges harshly the praxis of questing not only the commands but also the office of parents, boss, and God, with its intent of negating their "autocratic" repression of carnal-human nature. Violence is now redefined as any act which interferes with the praxis of a dialectical paradigm, and its promotion of human nature. Therefore war crimes can be levied upon any person or people who praxis a patriarchal paradigm, who attempt to sustain themselves in this paradigm as well as defending themselves from the praxis of a dialectical paradigm. This is the very essence of "liberation theology," now called "church growth," the "emerging church," and whatever else comes down the road basing its purpose upon the praxis of a dialectical paradigm.
"An act of violence is any situation in which some men prevent others from the process of inquiry ...any attempt to prevent human freedom is an 'act of violence.' Any system which deliberately tries to discourage critical consciousness is guilty of oppressive violence. Any school which does not foster students' capacity for critical inquiry is guilty of violent oppression." (Freire, P.1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. p.74)
Adam and Eve and the forbidden tree vs. Adam and Eve and God
"atonement of man with nature" vs. "atonement of man with God"
"pleasure principle" vs. "reality principle"
children of Eros vs. Father of Agape
redirected permissiveness vs. chastening
Heresiarch vs. Patriarch
Proletariat vs. Bourgeoisie
Have-nots vs. Haves
man and his carnal law vs. God and his spiritual law
self esteem vs. self control
synthesis vs. antithesis
"If it feel good, do it." vs. good and evil, right and wrong, obey
positive vs. negative
similar—to the things of this world vs. contrast—discrimination between that which is below, mankind and the things of this world (temporal & temporary) and that which is above, God and his kingdom (spiritual & eternal)
"is and ought" vs. "is and not"
theory vs. belief
questioning vs. obeying
"honest" doubt vs. faith
outgroup vs. ingroup
"seems to be" vs. truth
human "rights" vs. inalienable rights
ideas vs. ideals
speculating vs. knowing
uncertainty vs. certainty
deceit vs. honesty
positive force field vs. negative force field
so called science vs. real science
discourse, dialogue vs. discussion
You can get rid of the father, but then how do you get rid of the conscience, which recalls the fathers commands?
You can bypass (sear) of the conscience, but then how do you keep society from "exploding?"
“The overthrow of the king-father is a crime, but so is his restoration.... The crime against the reality principle is redeemed by the crime against the pleasure principle: redemption thus cancels itself.” (Marcuse) In other words, you can overthrow the patriarch but still retain a semblance of the patriarchal—the conscience—canceling out redemption from the praxis of the patriarchal paradigm itself. The crime of killing the father redeemed the tribe from repression, redeemed it from the oppressor and his laws of oppression (having to obey non-sensuous—non-human—commands, "obey me or else," i.e. God in the Garden in Eden—oppressive to sensuous desires; the mind still set on the flesh, i.e. the world, while supposedly still under Godly restraint produces a sensation of oppression). But to redeem their conscience from the guilt of the crime, the father's "oppressive" system was retained, thus canceling out redemption from the praxis of the patriarchal paradigm. Redemption would have to wait until all of society, at least a threshold or perception, a consensus, was present and "citizens" were willing and able to praxis the diabolical dialectic process and unite in the annihilation of the praxis of the patriarchal paradigm. It's annihilation, in both the life of the individual (alive in his mind, his emotions, and his habits—cognitive, affective, and psycho-motor), as a result of the patriarchal family structure still having control over the raising of children, and in society, (alive in its history, its nostalgia, and its customs), as the result of patriarchal individuals still having control over setting and maintaining public policy, could not be accomplished without doing "violence" to the individual and to society. This is Freud's take on how civilization was initiated and sustained, albeit in a "neurotic" state (a dichotomy of "haves against have-nots," connecting him to Karl Marx and his "haves against have-nots," the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat).
As Mortimer Adler, the founder and former director of the Aspen Institute in Aspen Colorado, wrote: “In my long experience of conducting Aspen seminars, in which the Communist Manifesto is read and discussed, I have always begun by saying that Marx is more right than wrong;” “Marx and Lenin were not wrong in all respects; nor were they entirely right. The Marxist-Leninist doctrine is not wholly true and sound; but neither is it wholly false and unsound. The millions upon millions of people who have lived under communism in this century have not been totally deluded, deceived, and misguided. Hence the other question to be answered . . .: What principles in Marxist-Leninist doctrine should be retained and what others should be rejected? The choice is not between the extremes of all or none, but rather in the middle ground of partial retention and partial rejection." (Mortimer Adler Haves Without Have-Nots) Leaders of the world (including US Presidents, Supreme Court Judges, owners of the major media outlets) are loyal members of the Aspen Institute after attending this week long training summit on transformational Marxism—Marx and Freud—and the 21st century. It is all about creating a world of haves without the have-nots, a world without the patriarchal paradigm of sovereignty, private property, capitalism, "this is mine and not yours," the chastening father, which is the cause, according to dialectical "reasoning," of the world of "have-nots," the world of "neurosis." The trickery was not to attack capitalism openly but rather to synthesize it with socialism, thereby effectively circumventing (negating) it. Private-public partnership circumvents (negates) the private. Father-family partnership circumvents (negates) the father.
“If society imposes repression, and repression causes the universal neurosis of man, . . . there is an intrinsic connection between social organization and neurosis.” (Brown)
The dilemma for Freud was how to kill the father figure (praxis patricide) and at the same time negate the affect of "the father figure in the mind"—the conscience—and still maintain civilization. "The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents." (Brown) Only if both the patriarch outside the person (the patriarchal few controlling the praxis of society, the father figure controlling the home, both resulting in a perception of the world under control of a patriarchal system) and the patriarch inside the person (the conscience, the father's standards of the past, internalized, restraining the individual from his natural human praxis—a condition termed "neurosis" by Freud, "incongruence" by Rogers) were annihilated (the children unite in the praxis of patricide—consensus), could all the children share equally in sensuous relations with the mother, with natural resources, where everyone could have access and freely relate, giving pleasure and receiving pleasure, in all ways and with all things in the world, at least in perception. Thus with the free praxis of interpersonal relationship with the environment around them, mankind could actualize a world of oneness, reuniting with a world from which they were originally created, i.e. "evolved" from—"In the beginning was matter."
According to Marcuse, and Freud, the praxis of patricide (externally and internally, in theory and in practice, in the individual and in society) liberates incest, then all things have the right (the "right" of the child) to enjoy pleasure (touch, taste, sight, smell, sound—sex) with all things, and creates the pathway to "higher civilization". Yet for Freud, how could the "serving and protecting" of the tribe, a remnant of the patriarchal paradigm, be maintained, while unrestrained Eros—"polymorphic perverse" behavior—flourished. His reasoning only lead him to the "explosion" of civilization. He could not resolve the dilemma and therefore was not willing to "explode" it, the Machiavellian way, as Marx was. “'These relations [hierarchy relations],' Marx states, 'are not those between one individual and another, but between worker and capitalist, tenant and landlord, etc. Eliminate these relations and you abolish the whole of society; …'” György Lukács History & Class Consciousness Class Consciousness March, 1920 Freud's only remedy was to put God on his couch, hoping that through self-analysis he would realize his humanity. J. L. Moreno, the Marxist father of role-playing stated: “I told Freud he put people on a couch and isolated them, which was entirely wrong. We don’t live on a couch; we live in groups from birth to death. Freud took people into the past, I take them into the present and future. Psychodrama deals with the Here-and-Now.” Jane Howard in her book Please Touch: A Guide Tour of the Human Potential Movement The contemporary "church" does this by putting the Bible on it's couch, i.e. in its encounter group, and conjure its meaning through the eyes of the group—humanizes it.
The nature of man according to Freud
According to Marcuse, once Freud's definition of the de-formation of civilization was explained, Freud's definition of the nature of man was necessary. Freud's perception of the nature of man is based upon two Greek mythological figures, Orpheus, and Narcissus. Orpheus represents man freely expressing himself i.e. internal Eros seeking expression. Narcissus represents man drawn to nature, finding a common identity of self in nature (in others), i.e. external Eros seeking recognition. Orpheus and Narcissus unite man in Eros—consensus.
Orpheus is the Eros of "self" being freely expressed. He is song. He unites all nature which hears and joins in his Eros. He is a homosexual making love to "young boys,"—Pederasty. Despite his beauty, he is hated by patriarchal centered women, whom he does not desire. Out of jealousy they kill him. They are, according to the UN's definition of patriarchal centered women, "the nuclear essence of transcendental evil power ... the bad or evil mother” UNESCO Tensions that cause war —the mother who spanks her child when he does not obey commands.
“Universal Reconciliation - where reconciliation includes the interaction of human beings with nature, with animals, plants, and minerals.” (Jürgen Habermas The Theory of Communicative Action. 1981)
Narcissus saw the reflection of his face in a body of water. He fell in love with it. He was not in love with himself; he was in love with his nature, his Eros, being reflected back to him from nature—Eros of self in "others." Thus, according to this mythological rendition of man, you are designed to freely express yourself in a way that others can see themselves in you, their Eros in you, and others must be given the right to freely express themselves so that you can see yourself in them, your Eros in them, so all can become self-actualized. It is this unification of man's common carnal nature, Eros, upon which consensus is actualized. This was the goal of traditional Marxist communism, albeit a bloody pathway, "Shoot the patriarch"—this sanitizes the village of patriarchal elements—for the sake of a healthy community and the next generation—but tends to weaken if not destroy the infrastructure of the village. Traditional Marxism has produced this outcome for over a century. It is the same quest for transformational Marxists—socialism, communism, globalism, humanism, environmentalism, social-psychologists, etc—today, but in their minds can be done without the shooting, yet. It's outcome is just as bloody but not as obvious (abortion, euthanasia, non-lethal weapons, etc.). The difference being, the shooting kills the patriarch's body but leaves his soul alive, the consensus process keeps the patriarch's body but kills his soul. The conversion method will be applied until dialectical control is universally accepted, then the final purging will be attempted. It is that plain and simple; it is the "logical outgrowth."
"Philosophy is a free and not self-seeking activity, … This activity contains the essential element of a negation, because to produce is also to destroy; … as Mind passes on from its natural form, it also proceeds from its exact code of morals and the robustness of life to reflection and conception. The result of this is that it lays hold of and troubles this real, substantial kind of existence, this morality and faith, and thus the period of destruction commences." "It may be said that Philosophy first commences when a race for the most part has left its concrete life, when separation and change of class have begun, and the people approach toward their fall; when a gulf has arisen between inward strivings and external reality, and the old forms of Religion, &c., are no longer satisfying; when Mind manifests indifference to its living existence or rests unsatisfied therein, and moral life becomes dissolved." (Hegel’s Lectures on the History of Philosophy Introduction B. Relation of Philosophy to Other Departments of Knowledge.)
"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." Ephesians 5:11
In the world which praxis' the dialectical paradigm, freedom of speech ends when one begins to exposes the deceitfulness and wickedness of its way.
"The person who comments on process sets himself apart from the others; he is viewed with suspicion as ‘not one of us.’" (Yalom)
Yet for Freud, Orpheus and Narcissus represented two opposites. Orpheus was Eros expressed—sensuousness, Narcissus was Eros enticing—morality. Narcissus Eros, Eros observed in others, produces a common felt identity with, compassion for, and a drawing towards others—laws of morality. Yet, Just as Freud could not justify the "explosion" of civilization, he could not, according to Marcuse, reconcile these "two poles of human existence." Sensuousness under social law—"morality"—becomes sublimated (the desire remains but can not be voiced or acted out for fear of punishment by the community to keep civilization from "exploding"), yet sensuousness, liberated, would result in anarchy and chaos, civilization "exploding".
The re-formation of
replacing the individual conscience with a social consensus
The 'fatherless society' where incest, the
'sensuous life,' reigns and individuality, the 'alienated life,' is
The replacement of 'inalienable rights' with 'human rights' in the praxis of compassion—feelings for the suffering of others—the negation of chastening, in defense of the flesh. Compassion for the flesh taking the place of compassion for the souls of man—losing sight of God and his purpose.
You can get rid of the father, but then how do you get rid of the
conscience, which remembers the fathers commands?
You can bypass (sear) the conscience, but then how do you keep society from "exploding?"
“... the aesthetic dimension and the corresponding feeling of pleasure ... is the center of the mind .... link[ing] the ‘lower’ faculties of sensuousness, (Sinnlichkeit) to morality ... – the two poles of human existence" (Marcuse)
Marcuse and the Frankfurt School found their solution to Freud's dilemma, of civilization "exploding," in Immanuel Kant's "aesthetic dimension." Hegel, Marx, and other dialectic pushers found something in Kant's work which they needed in their quest to justify their use of the process—democratic ethics. Kant, as taught, did not merge faith and reason, but supposedly left faith in tack. I disagree. He negated both. Reality for Kant was found in hope and hope was realized in happiness. Outside of happiness there is no reality, according to Kant. Since man is "hard wired," by God, to approach pleasure and avoid pain. Some neurons are "pre-wired" to inform us of environmental conditions of danger (avoid pain) or and others of environmental conditions of attraction (approach pleasure). It is the environment which allows the most freedom for pleasure which receives recognition and promotion, naturally, for the dialectical minded. It is the personal experience of pleasure, and its personal-social (private-public) actualization, which becomes the focus. For example: even in reading, Louise Rosenblatt "... distinction between two opposing modes of experiencing a text—the 'efferent' [recall and recitation] and the 'aesthetic.' ['thinking with feelings'—personal 'lived through' experiences involved]”.
Neurotransmitters, such as dopamine, chemically assist neurons in the conveying of this information, information acquired from the outside work and transmitted into our brain through the senses of touch, taste, sight, smell, and sound. The mind is affected by these neurons and neurotransmitters. For example, when dopamine is released into the brain via the pleasure neurons, awareness, muscle activity, and memory is heightened. This is all done for the sake of continuing, restoring, or creating an activity of pleasure. Thus, not until pleasure is experienced in the activity (praxis) of the brain, in accordance to the conditions in the surrounding environment, is happiness actualized. Although an artificial environment can be created in the mind—imagination, for Kant true happiness (reality) is only actualized when both the mind and the environment are synchronized in the moment—consensus.
“If the goal is a group goal [public-private] rather than individual goals [private] of the members, then the introduction of content into the group makes the group almost certain to be a brainwashing group.” Dr. Shofstall Dr. William Coulson, “Encounter Groups and Brainwashing” Notre Dame Journal of Education, 1971 The "appropriate information," necessary to attain the group goal, must first overwhelm and then negate any private information which interferes with group hegemony.
As a Catholic, Kant stated he believed in God, he also stating that God was only an opinion. According to Kant, since man has not experientially known God (materially though sensuous brain activity, triggered from the environment—carnally), God is not verifiable and can only be accepted by faith. So much for the testimony of Jesus Christ, "Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake." John 14:9-11 Thus Kant presented a Gnostic basis for his "Critique of Pure Reason," that the essence of God is all that can be knowable by man—sensuously—because it, God's essence, resides in man himself. Pleasure, being sensuous (Eros), and sensuousness being happiness, and happiness being mans hope, Kant's praxis, according to Marcuse, could become the mediator between Freud's praxis and Marx's praxis. The common "hope" for all mankind can thus be found in the praxis of Eros (pleasure).
"If there is a universal neurosis, it is reasonable to suppose that its core is religion. Psychoanalysis must treat religion as a neurosis." (Brown)
The dialectic paradigm is build upon sensuous reasoning—Eros—the negation of 'neurosis.' Thus the praxis of the love of pleasure liberates "neurotic" man from his self-environmental dialectical rift. Anyone who worships at this alter can not be a lover of God. Whatever begins with caprice (Orpheus—the law of the flesh), an impulse seeking oneness with the environment (Narcissus—contemplation), drawing man into oneness with the universe, and ends with pleasure (Kant-aesthetic dimension) is walking down this pathway of love—Eros. If this becomes the explanation of love—the orgiastic union of man with himself, his fellow man and with nature, all in sensuous harmony—consensus—then anyone interfering with this outcome becomes identified as "unreasonable" and must be categorized as an "agent of hate." He will be treated just as Jesus Christ was treated, even by the "church," especially by the "church." "The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil." John 7:7
For example, art is Eros expressed from an
artist (Orpheus), and Eros experienced by the observer (Narcissus), sublimated Eros, desired by the observer,
being liberated in the moment. “The
moment of reflection, however, is itself interwoven with experience.
‘The work of art,’ Marcuse can write, ‘is both a process and an
instant.’ Subjectivity experiences itself in that moment.”
Bronner Of Critical Theory and its Theorists) [Note:
the purpose of ink blots used in "counseling," to find a persons
degree of openness to his sublimated Eros “The individual may have
‘secret’ thoughts which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone
else if he can help it. To gain access is particularly important, for
precisely here may lie the individual’s potential for democratic or
antidemocratic thought and action in crucial situations.” (Theodor
Adorno The Authoritarian Personality)] “We can predict,
from the way individuals perceive the movement of a spot of light in a
dark room, whether they tend to be prejudiced or unprejudiced.” Carl
Rogers On Becoming A Person
Once the senses are properly identified and engaged (facilitated) then manifestation of Eros and attraction to Eros can be integrated in the moment. Sensuousness and morality, the common laws of nature, are re-united—re-educated. Both have joined in the "beauty" (in the sensuousness of pleasure) of the moment—consensus. Consensus means uniting through dialogue the sensuous—"a rational sensuousness and sensuousness rationalized"—"sensuous truth." “Stopping the internal dialogue [dialogue with the conscience] is, however, the key to the sorcerers’ world." Carlos Castenada Tales of Power, 1974; Richard Bandler, Patterns of the hypnotic techniques of Milton H. Erickson, Vol 1. 1975
Carl Rogers identified the environment necessary for the liberation of the senses from the control of the internal dialogue, from the conscience. The "open ended," "non-directed" elements of therapy provided the environment in which each and every client (child, worker, citizen, legislator, minister, etc.) was allowed the freedom to step out from under both the restraints of the conscience and the pre-determined "This is the right way to do things." of a patriarchal institution—parents, bosses, etc.—which interfered with their personal desire for "success" in the eyes of those they saw as instrumental in their future success in life. This was the same dialectical procedure (subtle scheme) Satan used to "liberate" Eve from God's demands, allowing her to actualize herself in the light of her own senses, drawing her into harmony with the environment, the world before her eyes—her own perception of the world. Once liberated from the fear of God, it all made sense.
"Can't you be reasonable (sensible)?"
“All that matters is that the opportunity for genuine activity be restored to the individual; that the purposes of society and of his own become identical.” (Erich Fromm Escape from Freedom) The "purpose" of both the individual and society, in dialectical thinking, is the praxis of social pleasure, collective Eros—consensus. The siblings and the mother can be reunited in sensuous synchronization—producing a "person centered" world (in actuality a "process centered" world , controlling human behavior through the control of the environment—mentally, emotionally, and physical. "Social action no less than physical action is steered by perception, [controlling a persons environment captures his perception: "To create effectively a new set of attitudes and values, the individual must undergo great reorganization of his personal beliefs and attitudes and he must be involved in an environment which in many ways is separated from the previous environment in which he was developed.” Krathwohl, Bloom, etc. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain, p. 84]" "It [perception] changes his cognitive structure, the way he sees the physical and social worlds, including all his facts, concepts, beliefs,. and expectations." "It modifies his valences and values, ... his attractions and aversions to groups and group standards, his feelings in regard to status differences, and his reactions to sources of approval or disapproval." It "affects motoric action, involving the degree of the individual's control over his physical and social movements"
The taxonomies of change: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor
The purpose of the dialectic is to seek,
utilize, and sustain tension, contradiction, and difference—accomplished through
dialogue i.e. no chastening,
The purpose of the dialectic is to negate a "peaceful fruit of righteousness" (Hebrews 12:11)—accomplished through chastening i.e. no dialogue.
Bloom developed the taxonomies of the Cognitive and Affective Domains. It was social engineers like E. H. Simpson (The Classification of Educational Objectives in the Psychomotor Domain) Anita Harrow (A taxonomy of psychomotor domain: a guide for developing behavioral objectives), and R. H. Dave (Developing and Writing Behavioral Objectives.) who developed the taxonomy of the psychomotor. (see websites Learning Domains of Bloom's Taxonomies, Harrow's Taxonomy of Psychomotor Domain, and Learning Domains of Bloom's Taxonomies) It was the major ingredient needed in the change process. Without a persons willful participation in the change process, its permanence could not be achieved in the individual, he would continually gravitate back into the established way of doing things ("right" vs. "wrong"). In other words, when the person is willing to change, because he realizes that not to change would produce pain—social alienation, and willing to change would produce pleasure—social approval, then the change would become internalized not just cognitively, with some more facts, or not just affectively, with a transient emotional moment, but also physically, with an experience permanently imprinted in the mind, the physical brain. As a result a person would be more receptive to the idea of change as a process, a way of life. Change instead of being resisted would now be earnestly sought after—"a tree [a method] to be desired to make one wise" Genesis 3:6. It would be realized as the pathway of pleasure, of happiness, i.e. as in "the pursuit of happiness." Thus anyone who stood in the way of social happiness would be perceived as "unhealthy." “Demonism concerns man’s attitude toward others.” Leonard Wheat Paul Tillich's Dialectical Humanism
Willful praxis in consensus would thus produce a society of people, mentally, emotionally, and physically (programmed of, by, and for social engineering), who would perceive human relationships—inter-personal relationships—as the "purpose" in life. Thus it was imperative for all institutions, that every act (praxis) of change took place in a facilitated group environment, where approval and disapproval would be utilized as the criterion of proper behavior. From thereon a person could not function apart from group consciousness. To live of, by, and for himself or for someone above him, according to their standards, would become to painful. This is why informing people of the truth, which might separate them from the the group, produces rejection towards you, it is just to painful for them to think on truth. They either "glaze over" or respond with "What is truth?" and "Who's truth?" The psychomotor, internal stress of social rejection, would prevent any effort on their part of participating in deep thought from a position of truth. Instead of thinking from a position to find agreement with a position of truth (deductive reasoning), they can only "think" to find error in your position of absolute truth (inductive reasoning).
E ≈ p, and if p ≈
v&b, then E ≈ v&b
(If the Environment influences perception, and if perception influences values and beliefs, then the Environment influences values and beliefs.)
Whoever controls the environment determines the values and beliefs.
The "shift" of environments, from patriarch (chastening, Eros restraining) to heresiarch (facilitating, Eros liberating) was the key to the globalizing of society (without "exploding" it). Without "perception control"—in favor of a social praxis, the individual, according to dialectical reasoning, would be forever isolated from his true human nature, and as a result remain a vessel of anxiety and hate, "neurotic," split from his potential and "purpose," prevented from actualizing his hopes, his "happiness" in the world of change. Whoever influences the environment (E), influences perception (p). Whoever influences perception influences a persons "values and beliefs" (v&b), Thus the environment (chastening, permissive, or facilitated) directly affects a persons "values and beliefs." That is unless he has spiritual eyes and spiritual ears, and is looking for a kingdom not of mans making. "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ." 2 Corinthians 11:3 "If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth." Colossians 3:1 By setting our mind on things of the earth, the relationship between men, while supposedly serving God, who is not a respecter of men, we deceive ourselves into thinking we are doing his will, when in fact we are doing our will. As long as we do it subtlety most men will perceive our praxis as doing God's will.
“Memory is not education, answers are not knowledge. Certainty and memory are the enemies of thinking, the destroyer of creativity and originality.” (William Glasser Schools without Failure)
“Every time we teach a child something, we keep him from inventing it himself.” Jean Piaget
With the shift of environments in the classroom, for example, from the teacher instructing students to a teacher-student partnership, from formal instruction and memorization to informal dialogue and speculation, from rows to circles, etc. the classroom shifted from education concerning facts (truth)—memorizing truth and obedience, self-control in behavior being the desired outcome (traditional outcome based education: where the patriarchal paradigm was sustained—focusing upon maintaining a status quo i.e. retaining a hierarchy, a top-down system) to re-education concerning beliefs and values (opinions)—building relationships skills and questioning authority, self-esteem and group-esteem in behavior being the desired outcome (transformational outcome based education: where the patriarchal paradigm was replaced, negated, with the heresiarchal paradigm—a paradigm focusing upon change i.e. striving for equality of opportunity).
"The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to a group [“It is not the will or desire of any one person which establish order but the moving spirit of the whole group. Control is social.” John Dewey Experience and Education 1931]" “If human rights are to be guaranteed, they must be guaranteed by appropriate social, political, and economic controls of human behavior.” Kenneth Benne Human Relations in Curriculum Change. ‘We must accept the fact that some kind of control of human affairs is inevitable. We cannot use good sense in human affairs unless someone engages in the design and construction of environmental conditions which affect the behavior of men.” Carl Rogers On becoming a person "The leader has skills in human relations and can manage the interplay of individual differences so that human energy may be controlled in pursuit of common goals. . . Leadership of this type [is] based on liberation rather than domination." Wilbur Brookover A Sociology of Education "Change agents must have a method of social engineering relevant to initiating and controlling the change process.” (Benne)
The environment favoring a patriarchal paradigm has a praxis of revelation (representative form of government), requires obedience, and develops and sustains the conscience. It is a "closed system," guided by absolutes—heterosexual, monogamy The environment favoring a matriarchal paradigm has a praxis of rebellion (anarchy), engenders "laissez faire," and results in confusion. It is a "chaos system," guided by "feelings not thought" (Yalom)—heterosexual-adultery. The environment favoring a heresiarchal paradigm has a praxis of revolution (democratic form of "government"—a government of, by, and for the manipulators of people), is contingent upon change, and initiates and sustains consensus. It is an "open system," guided by "feelings only with thought" (Yalom)—homosexual-adultery-incest ("down low" ). Globalism and "world peace," can only be achieved via the latter environment. The patriarch environment must be negated and the heresiarch environment must take its place if the "man of peace," the beast, is to be actualized. Peter Drucker, the mind behind the Church Growth agenda, exemplified the heresiarchal (homosexual) paradigm.
"But what, after all, is democracy? Nothing but the absence of masters who could govern you, and the acceptance of this unavoidable absence, the attempt to manage without them." Frederick Engels, The Condition of England, Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher, 1844
An example of this method of environmental control, the use of "group dynamics" to "shift" a persons paradigm, can be found in Kurt Lewin's work on Iowa housewives (work done in the early 40's). In the environment of consensus man is freed from the environment of "domination"—the "non-sensuousness" of the Patriarchal paradigm. "To deny rights to 'democratic' leadership [dialectical "felt" needs "Christian" leadership] in influencing the course of current change is, in effect, to sell out control of required changes to non-democratic leadership [Patriarchal Christian leadership]." "Democratic method attempts to achieve an intelligent and uncoerced consensus." (Benne) Did he say "uncoerced consensus?" Here is how Carl Rogers defined the use of this "uncoerced consensus" process "We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood." "We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled, though they are following a code much more scrupulously than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free." "By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior―the motives, the desires, the wishes. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises." "If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow." (Carl Rogers On Becoming A Person)
Instead of using physical force this process uses emotional coercion—cognitive dissonance—an internal physical coercion—tension—which can result in an emotional and physical breakdown—depression. This is why it is important to "trust in the Lord," and not in man, yourself included, at all times Proverbs 3:5, 6. The abdication/takeover of education follows this shift from didactic to dialectic. The latter (dialectic) can only take over as the former (didactic) abdicates—he moves from proclaiming truth into "discovering" truth through the consensus process. The key to their success is the creating of an environment, through the use of a facilitator, to pressure the didactic-patriarch into abdication. It is that simple. We are like sheep. “If the school does not claim the authority to distinguish between science and religion, it loses control of the curriculum [the paradigm used to shape the next generation] and surrenders it to the will of the electorate.” Society as Educator in an Age of Transition, Ed. Kenneth Benne, Eighty-sixth Year of the National Society for the Study of Education, Chicago Press. Ill. 1987, p. 259 All science is didactic (2 + 2 = 4 and ≠ any other number same paradigm as the Bible—"I am God and there can be no other," an "Is"-"Not" paradigm) until it is applied to man. When applied to man it becomes dialectic—"so called science." "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane [and] vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen." 1 Timothy 6:20-21
Tie God to your sensuousness and before long you serve a sensuous god.
As one minister responded to this presentation, even yelling at me, mingling eastern mystic concepts with his response—substituting God's word with the words "heartbeat," "passion," and "purpose" (sensuous fusion words; using etymology for the secularization of religious terminology): "It is the reality of the people of God hungering after God, asking the Holy Spirit to synchronize their hearts with the heartbeat of God, being willing to repent of any perception, presumption, motivation, attitude or concept that is contrary to His heart. Therefore, in submission to Jesus as the Head of Church (Ephesians 5:23), the people of God are made to be channels of the power of the Holy Spirit, Who enables them to be living expressions of the passion and purposes of God." Our hungering is after righteousness: "Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled." Matthew 5:6 which can only come from God. You can not synchronize (a new age, eastern religion concept when applied to humans, relating to manipulation: "to represent or arrange (events) to indicate coincidence or coexistence" Merriam Webster's Dictionary) your heart (which is deceitful and desperately wicked: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9) with the "heartbeat of God" (a sensuous concept: heart of God used in Ezekiel 28:2, 6 in identifying Satan's attempt to be equal with God). This is an example of "pastors'" possessed with the dialectical process, the subtle mingling of man (sensuousness) and God (Spirit). Contrition—repentance for sinning before a holy and pure and righteous God—is substituted with an attitude of being an associate with God. This is demonic. This is the sensuousness which Jack Gibbs could have easily used for "channeling" his desired outcome, the synchronization of the church with the dialectical world system. "I create my own passionate path. When I put my full energy, coming from the deepest part of me, into a pathway to which I can dedicate my earthly and eternal life, I inevitably create my own spirituality." Jack Gibb was a member of the Marxist based National Training Laboratories and worked, in the 60's and 70's, on how to bring the church into the "emerging" process through "trust." "Pastors" are using this "trust" to build their "churches of purpose" upon.
A man who calls himself a minister can not praxis this paradigm and serve the Lord Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ who denied himself and picked up his cross and has called us to do the same. Not only are dialectically-minded people, including ministers, deceived (a con-sensuous praxis) but they will also take pleasure in deceiving others (likewise a con-sensuous praxis).
Without this "logical purpose," without this "felt" need to resolve a "mythological conflict" between the carnal desires of the individual and the moral laws of society (replacing a real need for contrition and repentance by carnal man before a Holy God), sensitivity training would not be pressing down upon Americans as it is today. According to Nietzsche, the "ugliest man" is God with his patriarchal paradigm of "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Exodus 20:3—the patriarchal Father. The "ugliest man" is also the Father's son—the patriarchal Son, Jesus Christ—obeying his Fathers patriarchal paradigm, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12, the son who gave his father the credit for all things, even calling the disciples "the Fathers disciples," "I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word." John 17:6. God's patriarchal praxis must be annihilated because he demands obedience to his laws, laws contrary to the laws of "human" nature. Laws which expose man's wickedness and hopelessness apart from God's work alone. Laws which man can not fulfil in himself. Laws which require humbling and repentance. Laws which require a life lived according to God's will alone. Because of God's mercy and God's grace alone, accomplished through the atoning work of his son, Jesus Christ, we can to overcome this "body of death." God's law exposes all of man's wickedness and requires him to daily die to his carnal desires, his wisdom, his way. Apart from Christ's work, his imputed righteousness, "(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.)" Romans 5:13, apart from the work of the Holy Spirit, sent by the Father, through the work of his son, Jesus Christ, we can not do his will. All praxis in Christ's kingdom is patriarch. His kingdom is not of this world and thus can not praxes heresy—change.
God declares that man's eyes are "eyes full of adultery," thus, dialectically speaking, God's paradigm, in the eyes and ears of man, is not "beautiful," but instead is ugly. The harlot is beautiful, for she satisfies all of man's "felt" needs, but those who expose her and resister her are treated as evil. "And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration. And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities." Revelation 17:6, 7; 18:3-5 Therefore, for a time, all those who praxis God's patriarchal paradigm must be "killed"—at least not listened to and definitely not put in any position of authority. "Why did they kill the ugliest man?" According to Nietzsche, "Because they could not stand him." According to Marx, man must remove God, the "ugliest man" (the patriarchal paradigm—the "opiate"), remove the patriarchal God from his mind and from his society (from his ears and his eyes—from his perception) if he wants to experience (praxis) social harmony and peace, if he wants to enjoy the beauty of the cosmos.
It is up to the village to purge the community of patriarchal elements so the next generation can be raised in a "healthy community," a "healthy school" ("drug free zone" is in fact an 'opiate' free zone which means "a patriarch free zone") and a "healthy church." Then the common "good" of the human race "can be" actualized. This was the "purpose" and praxis of the Directorate in the French Revolution, of the Soviet in the Soviet Union, and is the "purpose" and praxis of every facilitated meeting used today in the praxis of "resolving" common social "felt" needs—"Can't we all just get along." Only this time instead of killing the body, they will, by the mingling of the opinions of men (change) with the Word of God (unchanging) leave your body and kill your soul. “The philosophers have come up with many different views of the world, the objective however, is change.” Marx Feuerbach Thesis # 11, Instead of rejecting God we will be coerced, "willingly of course," into synchronizing man with God, circumventing his way, which is finished, atonement—"it is finished."
The man of faith can not praxis the dialectic paradigm. He will instead be profiled as causing dissention, being "divisive." He will be neutralized, then marginalized, and if necessary killed, for the goodness of the village, for the perception necessary for peace (evolution is "environment change produces necessity to stay alive, which the justifies physical, mental, and social change, change in a person paradigm—all based upon the eyes, ears, and understanding of man"). Thus, scriptures properly describe the dialectical man: "There is no fear of God before their eyes" Romans 3:18, and Karl Marx explains why: "having eyes which are human eyes, and ears which are human ears" Karl Marx. This is why people "glaze over," or yell at you, when you attempt to warn them of the error of this way. It is not that I condemn them, I condemn the pathway they have chosen to take, a pathway of condemnation, which they seem to be enjoying, for the moment at least. Regarding Moses and his faith in God, he chose "rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;" Hebrews 11:25
"alienated labor [capitalist, patriarch labor, work by "the sweat of thy face"] ... absence of gratification, negation of ... pleasure." (Marcuse)
"And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Genesis 3:17-18
According to Marcuse, the problem of civilization "exploding" remained an issue. “Freed from constraints ... man ... without work and order ... would fall back into nature ... [and] destroy culture.” (Marcuse) Communism around the world had simply resulted in a disaster (the barbarism of WW I and WW II pail in comparison). The cause of this disaster, according to the transformational Marxist, was their effort to prevent the "explosion" of civilization, justifying its brutal suppression. Thus Marxists were not achieving Marx's desired end until the Frankfurt School “found the missing link in Freud.” (Martin Jay The Dialectical Imagination. A History of the Frankfurt School and the Inst. of Social Research) But Freud's ideology could not resolve the sensuousness-morality conflict, keeping an antithesis paradigm in place, sustaining cultural "neurosis." Neither Marx's nor Freud's outcome could be realized, according to Marcuse, until the definition of the purpose of "labor" was clarified. Remember—Whoever defines terms for you controls your life.
"…the dialectic of the moral life is linked to the development of the system of social labour." "Therefore the dialectic of the moral life must repeat itself until the materialist spell that is cast upon the reproduction of social life, the Biblical curse of necessary labour, is broken technologically." Jürgen Habermas Knowledge & Human Interest, 1968, publ. Polity Press, 1987. Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory
Labor was always tied to the family members (Marx called them the proletariat) under the rule of the patriarch(s) (Marx called them the Bourgeoisie), a "hierarchical division of labor", and therefore labor and its conditions is mandated and justified from above, "Moreover, this hierarchical division of pleasure was ‘justified’ by protection, security, and even love: because the despot was the father, the hatred with which his subjects regarded him must from the beginning have been accompanied by a biological affection—ambivalent emotions which were expressed in the wish to replace and imitate the father, to identify oneself with him, with his pleasure as well as with his power." (Marcuse) Labor under a patriarchal paradigm was therefore seen as repressive; “Men ... work in alienation .... labor time is painful time [man was outside the garden, a garden of leisure and guaranteed sustenance, under God's curse, resulting in pain and death], for alienated labor is absence of gratification, negation of the pleasure principle [man inside the garden of pleasure, free to eat of all the trees, without Godly restraint or curse; "We'll keep God around as long as he doesn't arbitrarily make up rules and boss us around, as long as we have the 'human right' to 'question authority,'" the "right of the child" to question the "right of the parent."].” (Marcuse) “First, that the work is external to the worker, that it is not a part of his nature, that consequently he does not fulfill himself in his work but denies himself.” (Karl Marx)
"And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me." Luke 9:23 Ephesians 4
Surplus Labor—"enforced constraint on pleasure and enforced abstinence"
Domination “... is exercised by a particular group or individual in order to sustain and enhance itself in a privileged position. ... the specific historical institutions of the reality principle and the specific interests of domination introduce additional controls over and above .... civilized human association .... additional controls arising from the specific institutions of domination are what we denote as surplus repression.” (Marcuse)
With Godly restraint, Eros could not be realized in the work place because the worker must "renounce the freedom of the libidinal subject-object [Orpheus-Narcissus] which the human organism primarily is and desires,"—if the project is to be done on the boss's time and in the boss's way. “The worker therefore feels himself at home only during his leisure, whereas at work he feels homeless.” “His work is not voluntary but imposed, forced labour.” (Karl Marx—who never knew the satisfaction which can come from honest work.) [Note: volunteerism, as it is in the soviet system, is being pushed today in America. Peter Drucker spent his life studying non-profit organizations. Why do people work for nothing? It is the pleasure of Eros (dopamine) they receive from giving. Rick Warren built his "church" growing business on Peter Drucker's teachings. Drucker was always interested in and secretly promoted a homosexual paradigm.] According to Brown, “Repressed Eros is the energy of history and labor must be seen as sublimated Eros” because the “division of labor has nothing to do with happiness.” (Brown) “Man exists only part time, during the working days, as an instrument of alienated performance [capitalist performance]; the rest of the time he is free for himself.” “The irreconcilable conflict is not between work and Eros, but between alienated labor [capitalist, top-down hierarchy] and Eros.” (Marcuse) The working man could only praxis Eros outside of the workplace, limiting it to the "socially approved" purpose of procreation, thereby supporting a patriarchal paradigm. "The primal father prepared the ground for progress through enforced constraint on pleasure and enforced abstinence.... the first preconditions for the disciplined ‘labor force’ of the future.” (Marcuse) For the Frankfurt School, the solution was the praxis of “Using social environmental forces to change the parent’s behavior toward the child.” (T. W. Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality, 1950, p. 6)
Remember, this is all justified from Greek mythology in an effort to circumvent and negate God and His Way. The assumption is the original patriarch restrained Eros in the children-mother relationship, i.e. separated people from their natural desire to relate with nature, and established a mandate for people to control nature, including their own. Because of the "abuse" of the patriarchal paradigm—"child abuse: preventing children from the praxis of their Eros nature," the children killed the patriarch (to actualize a child-mother Eros relationship, a people-nature relationship—environmentalism), yet they prevented the actualization of the mother-child Eros relationship when they restored the system of the patriarch in their effort to maintain order in the tribe, to prevent an "explosion." As a result, civilization was born. Thus, the children at the top, who had free access to nature, the realization of Eros, not only restrained their own actualization but also restrained it from those now under their control, preventing all under their authority from the praxis of self-actualization. Therefore, to motivate people to work, forced labor was justified to keep civilization from "exploding."
"Culture War" The
traditional home vs. globalism
Restoring the tower of Babel.
The laborer, working in this environment of restrained Eros, built up anger toward the owners of business and property but could not release it on them for fear of loss of job, loss of what little access they had to nature. Therefore, according to "dialectical logic," because the labor was not willing to realize his freedom by killing the boss, the patriarch, he instead releases his anger upon the objects or persons the patriarch expresses his anger towards, those with a deviant behavior (according to the bosses, the patriarch's standards), thus producing an "in-group," "out-group" prejudice. To save himself from the bosses wrath, the worker must suppress his Eros, and supplant it with the approval of those above. He then caries this paradigm home with him and forces it upon the family, demanding the family repress their Eros as the laborer had to at work. If the children where to "get a piece of the pie" they would have to go into the work place as well and perform to the boss's standards. It was therefore imperative they learn and praxis socially approved behavior. The children (future labor force) experiencing chastening at home, to restrain Eros, expecting and accepting chastening in the workplace, to likewise restrain Eros, to gain the "right" of accessing socially approved pleasure—producing and sustaining "cultural neurosis." Because no one is there to help facilitate the family from the patriarch's paradigm (kill the patriarch), they succumbed to the parents authority and grew up expecting the same paradigm to be practiced in their community. The "culture war" is between the patriarchal children of a didactical praxis (local culture) and the heresiarchal children of a dialectical praxis (global culture, i.e. anti-culture). The heresiarchal children of change now have a major influence over International, national, state, county, and local law and policy making, whether it be in business, education, labor, government, and even the church. We are in the midst of a socially engineered avalanche, "a mass of unstable people moving in the same general direction." (Dean Gotcher) The problem is, providing one survives the downward flow of civilization, the solidifying of the mass at the bottom of the hill will be fatal. If one is not outside the final synchronous event (the actualization of New World Order), in other words is nonsynchronous, then spiritual death is emanate.
“Marx had compared the money complex with the religious complex, as two forms of human self-alienation.” (Brown)
If the parents have property, if the children expect to inherit it, they must behave properly—restrain their Eros. Thereby the next generation is "programmed" to function under a paradigm of repressed Eros (capitulation-capitalism). “One of the primary value systems underlying conservative ideology is concerned with practicality, ambition, and upward class mobility. These values are reflected in the raising and indoctrination of children, who ‘should learn early in life the value of a dollar.’” (Adorno) Through such inculcation they accept alienated labor (anti-homosexual, capitalist, patriarchal based labor) as the proper way of life. "Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God: And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ." Colossians 3:22-24 They accept living under the control of those at the top, accepting and demanding obedience to objective truth for themselves and for their family. The children internalize, via the patriarchal praxis, the only way they can achieve "the good life," albeit a life of restrained Eros, is to submit to higher authority, accept a patriarchal paradigm. “The monogamic family, with its enforceable obligations for the father, restricts his monopoly of pleasure; the institution of inheritable private property, and the universalization of labor, give a son a justified expectancy of his own sanctioned pleasure in accordance with his socially useful performances.” (Marcuse) Therefore the correlation between the monogamic family, private property, and the universalization of labor becomes identified as the obstacle to achieving a "higher civilization." The barrier to a community tolerant of homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality, pornography, incest, etc. "as long as no one is hurt," is a people who fear the judgment of God, and believe in and obey objective truth.
For the next generation to achieve the control over Eros (private property), they must accept the universalization of labor (expect all to work for their existence, suppress their Eros). Private property perpetuates an acceptance of restriction of pleasure in the praxis of the next generation. If they are to attain socially sanctioned pleasure, they must initiate, if necessary, and sustain a patriarchal environment. This was Freud's reasoning for the "neurosis" of labor. The key for overcoming the neurosis was to change the work environment, to advance child-mother Eros (matriarchal discourse) in the work place, so the laborer would be free of pent up anger, and thus back at home would not praxis a patriarchal paradigm. This would effectively free the family of the use of chastening as a means to a life of limited Eros (due to the fear of those at work disaproval). The repression of Eros is out—chastening is negated, and the actualization of Eros is in—sensuously reasoned discourse is "actualized" (you once could only talked to yourself, secretly, about the desire of Eros, "I ought to be able to ...," but now, since all can freely participate in dialogue about the desire of Eros—glasnosts, perestroika, openness, self esteem-group esteem—and all can come to an agreement on how to labor in it—come to consensus—then self (Eros) can be "actualized"—Eros can "come out of the 'closet'").
In actuality the laborer, the one concerned about making something work right, is inhibited from taking a stand on facts which restrain Eros. He is therefore frustrated (abused) at work. Since the praxis of Eros in the workplace wears down his resolve to properly chasten himself, and others. Since overt chastening, "rightsizing," being passed over in promotion, etc. is used in the workplace to keep control of those who might question or challenge the use of this diabolical process. If he does not know the love of the Lord, in frustration, he will practice "abuse" in the home, where he will no longer praxis chastening in the home, or he "takes it out" on the wife and the children—domestic violence (a byproduct of diaprax—the praxis of mans carnal desires, self-justified). A husband who occupies a God given office (expecting his wife to submit to his office and chastening his children when they are wrong while under God's supporting, providing, chastening leading), will become a tyrant when he uses that same office for his own selfish desires, whether done for the approval of a group or for ones own self. "Group think" is still "What can I get out of this relationship for myself." Eros preservation is self-preservation, whether done individually or in a group). Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. Mark 8:34
Sensitivity training (the praxis of the dialectical process) is an attempt to actualize homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality, in the the post-modern "family." One only has the right to chasten when there is absolute "right and wrong." To chasten when there are "no lasting truths" is abusive, sadomasochism. As stated before, when Eros is in, chastening is out, when the mother-child (species-"family") Eros is in—incest (self-actualization), the father (the traditional family) is out. According to social-psychology, which is built upon Marx and Freud (who was built upon Orpheus—a homosexual Greek mythological figure, who made love to "young boys"), if patricide (revolution) is actualized, incest (proletariat) is actualized, if the patriarch (Bourgeoisie) is annihilated, "sin" (revelation) is annihilated, then class warfare (parent over child, teacher over student, God over man, Spirit over flesh) ceases, and the world can arrive at peace—where Eros, "in life and in death," is actualized and neurosis, "life against death," is annihilated, where mans spirit and mans flesh is actualized and Gods spirit against mans flesh is annihilated. "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption." I Corinthians 15:50 "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage." Hebrews 2:14-15 "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand." Ephesians 6:12-13
"Child" labor laws and works salvation
(To come between the parent and their children to prepare the children for an Eros-homosexual workplace.)
“Events of early childhood are of prime importance for the happiness and work-potential of the adult.” (Adorno)
“Salvation Is a By-Product of Self-Actualizing Work and Self-Actualizing Duty.” “In self-actualizing people, the work they do might be better be called ‘mission,’ ‘calling,’ ‘duty,’ ‘vocation,’ in the priest’s sense.” (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management)
It is important to know why social-psychologists are so interested in the study of children “the impact of Sigmund Freud’s work on modern culture ....the connection between the suppression of children ... both within the home and outside.” (Adorno) It is the child's carnal nature (mankind's "true" nature "law of the flesh,"—freed from patriarchal control, the "Law of God") which facilitators (most I suspect unknowingly—most being deceived) are releasing upon civilization though the praxis of consensus. Church Growth, Emerging Church, the contemporary Church being examples. Can people come to Christ, or Christians be in these institutions? Yes. But if they stay (in Egypt), what faith they have will die.
"And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable." "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." "Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin:" Isaiah 3: 4, 5, 12; 30:1
The Synergy of Eros and the Eros of Synergy
The key to resolving this dilemma of Freud's, concerning the workplace, was found in the use of consensus. It is no longer home-to-work (patriarchal home-to-patriarchal work), it is school-to-work (heresiarchal school-to-heresiarchal work). If everybody's input of feelings could be included in making a decision in the workplace and then acted upon, Eros could be brought into a workplace of pleasure “... the liberation of Eros could create new and durable work relations.” (Marcuse) “Underneath the habits of work in every man lies the immortal instinct for play [the child of caprice within].” (Brown) Instead of people fleeing work to find Eros, they would seek and enjoy Eros in the workplace, work would become also play. “The human relations connected with work may ‘provide for a very considerable discharge of libidinal component impulses, narcissistic, aggressive, and even erotic.’” (Marcuse quoting Freud Civilization and Its Discontents) Bringing Eros into the workplace would result in "the organization of the human existence into an instrument of labor.”
Motivational speaking was one way of helping bring Eros into the workplace. Abraham Maslow wrote: “My work on motivations come from the clinic, from a study of neurotic people.” “This carry-over from the study of neurosis to the study of labor in factories is legitimate.” “The main support of this theory has come mostly from psychotherapists like Rogers and Fromm.” “Work is not about paying the rent anymore--it is about self-fulfillment.” “The United States is changing into a managerial society.” (Maslow) Maslow speculated ("I think, I feel, I predict") a physiological evolution (genetically) in agreement with his hierarchy of "felt" needs: Audio.
The only problem to their outcome was to be found with the patriarchal remnant who had positions of authority, official and non-official, who would not accept a workforce seeking leisure and guaranteed sustenance, who would not accept the conditions of "restoring" the Garden in Eden without God and his law of restraint. i.e. his control over man's nature and the natural resources—"It's my Garden and not your Garden" (from which property rights and parent's rights are grounded). The Garden in Eden, according to the Gnostic story, is "mother earth." It is Satan who said, without the patriarch—fear of God and his law—you can decide for yourself what is right and what is wrong, according to your common sensuous desires, according to your perception, according to your reasoning. In other words "If you do it my way you can have pleasure with mother any way your senses take you." If this sounds perverse and makes you sick, it should, but this is the pathway this nation has chosen, including its "churches."
There are those who don't go out to the forest to cut a tree. Instead, they make laws to stop the cutting of trees so they can go out to hug a tree or two or more and have incest with "mother earth." And if the forest should burn, it is better they be sacrificed to mother earth than be used by patriarchal man. The purpose of natural resources ("mother earth") is not for personal profit (procreation), but for common pleasure (Eros) We have "shifted" from a producer people to a consumer people and are ripe (disgusting odor) for the picking. "... reproduction is merely a ‘by-product.” “The primary content of sexuality is the ‘function of obtaining pleasure from zones of the body’” (Marcuse quoting Freud) “Fore-pleasure is the preliminary play with all parts of the body, and represent a perpetuation of the pure polymorphous perverse play of infantile sexuality.” (Brown)
Human feelings, sensuousness, the Eros of others, must be incorporated into the thought process of each individual so the praxis of society can be one of pleasure—"The Imagination of the Heart," "The Dialectical Imagination." This praxis must annihilate a patriarchal praxis in "theory," in the individual (releasing Eros desires from the man), and in "practice," in society (revealing Eros desires common to man), if it is to realized. It will seek to do so. Yet not all will participate, some will instead repent of their sins before a loving patriarchal Heavenly Father, accept the propitiation of his son, Jesus Christ, and turn and serve Him under a patriarchal paradigm, even unto death in this life, looking forward to an eternity life with him. "And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death." Revelation 12:11
"Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others." Ephesians 2:2, 3
"Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance: But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy." 1 Peter 1: 13-16
without purpose' 'lawfulness without law'
("rules without rules" "purpose without purpose" "purpose without interest")
“In the aesthetic imagination, sensuousness generates universally valid principles for an objective order. The two main categories defining this order are 'purposiveness without purpose' — i.e. beauty, 'lawfulness without law' — i.e. freedom. 'Zweckmässigkeit ohne Zweck; Gesetzmässigkeit ohne Gesetz'” “Whatever the object may be (thing or flower, animal or man), it is represented and judged not in terms of its usefulness, not according to any purpose it may possible serve, and also not in view of it ‘internal’ finality and completeness." (Marcuse)
Any 'object' which places unreasonable i.e. non-sensuous, non-sense restraint upon or barriers against common human sensuous experience (praxis) is to be responded towards as being non-viable, i.e. seen as illusionary. “Everything that is not reducible to number [sensuous-material] becomes illusion for the Enlightenment.” (Bronner) It is not the number fruit of or type of fruit which is of concern here, it is the measuring of the quality of relationship in the experience of working with fruit: fruitfulness without fruit or fruitiness without fruit.
"Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. Though a sinner do evil an hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before him: But it shall not be well with the wicked, neither shall he prolong his days, which are as a shadow; because he feareth not before God." Ecclesiastes 8:11-13
The dialectical generation will only recognize the patriarchal parent as an object of ridicule. This is how every person who praxis a patriarchal paradigm is to be treated in a facilitated meeting, training the next generation how to recognize, neutralize, marginalize, and annihilate this paradigm from the face of the earth. Norman O. Brown believed that “Freud did not abandon the illusion that Adam really fell.” “We on the other hand cling to the position that Adam never really fell.” (Brown) “The philosophical effort to mediate, in the aesthetic dimension, between sensuousness and reason thus appears as an attempt to reconcile the two spheres of the human existence which were torn asunder by a repressive reality principle.” “... the aesthetic reconciliation implies strengthening sensuousness as against the tyranny of reason and, ultimately, even calls for the liberation of sensuousness from the repressive domination of reason.” “... on the basis of Kant’s theory, the aesthetic function becomes ... the philosophy of culture ... a non-repressive civilization, in which reason is sensuous and sensuousness rational ...[according to Schiller] the possibility of a new reality principle. [i.e. a New World Order].” (Marcuse) This explains the "culture war" going on today. It is more than culture which is at stake, it is the soul of man which is at stake.
“To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit; and this book cannot without sinning communicate that experience to the reader." (Brown)
Sensitivity training is the rage of today. Every institution is being "encouraged" to participate (example 1, example 2). Few people realize the history of such action (praxis). Its "logical outgrowth" is the elimination of a patriarchal effect in both individual thinking and social practice (praxis). Examples of such praxis can be found even in our Courts. The Lemon Test (Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971), also referred to as the tripartite test, for example, has been used to finalize the sanitization of our education system of a patriarchal paradigm—a patriarchal paradigm is based on discipline, morals, and self control under a father figure, a patriarch. The Lemon Test is being used to communize (negate the father figure; patricide) the schools, making them "drug free," the drug being Marx's "Opiate," the opiate being unquestioned obedience to God, teacher, parent, etc. as a final authority figure. The dialectical praxis of the courts from the 50's on has been the communist agenda for 1) removing the Ten Commandments, "Obey me or else," from the public school house walls, 2) removing prayer to the Lord Jesus Christ—the prayer our highest court declared as "dangerous" was "God is good, God is great, let us thank him for our food. In Christ we pray. Amen," 3) removing the reading of scriptures in the classroom, many of which were printed in the public text books in a free America, and 4) spanking in the public classrooms. Spanking reinforces the praxis of the patriarchal home. To spank justifies the praxis of "right" vs. "wrong" (to evaluate one's thoughts and behavior from God's standards—established forever, certain) to negate spanking justifies "situational ethics" (to evaluate one's thoughts and behavior from the human moment—ever changing, uncertain).
Our highest court has turned to men such as James Coleman for information and advice on re-education. Coleman's teacher was Paul Lazersfield, a Marxist of the Frankfurt School.
Judges, years after the tripartite test was "conjured up," question its relationship to our inalienable rights (a patriarch paradigm), yet continue to use it to destroy any remnant of patriarchal morals, morals which were foundational to the formation of our nation. Unfortunately, "conservatives" only join in the noise of dialogue. The Lemon Test states: first, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose (the emphasis went from limiting government to a controlling secular government: States rights were negated through the dialectical interpretation of the 14 Amendment, thereby effectively giving the dialectically based courts access to the Bill of Rights so they could redefine them, neutralizing them with the use of universal human rights, thus negating our individual and national sovereignty and thereby negating our borders—Karl Marx's dream); second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion (subjective-humanistic agenda; doublespeak for "If there is any religious commitment or conviction present it must be rejected." "The community needs, therefore, to be explored and, if necessary, purged from undesirable cultural conserves .... The community must be 'deconserved' from the pathological excesses of its own culture, or at least, they must be put under control." J. L. Moreno Who Shall Survive, Moreno was a Marxist, the father of "role-playing"); finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion," (thus, if a liberal complains, then the statute is religious and must be removed, but if a religious person protests against the liberal opinion then he is being non-rational and argumentative. The last state to have a state church was Massachusetts in 1833, so I guess most of the states were breaking the Constitution from the get-go, liberals and secular Christians would say so. The truth being, the church is the bride of Christ and should not be recognized and supported by secular government. It must not be controlled in any way by a secular government). All this was done on the "sensitivity" agenda of materialists, whose bottom line was contempt for biblical principles and a hate for a patriarchal paradigm. A paradigm which builds a society upon "good" vs. "evil," didactic, deductive, patriarchal praxis, a praxis which "alienates" the secular from the sacred where the sacred can go into and persuade in the secular but the secular can not go into and influence in the sacred. If faith is to be lived and freely shared, hated or not, the church must build a society upon a patriarchal paradigm. It starts in the patriarchal home, under God.
The liberal bias is a prejudice against a traditional father paradigm and hate toward a patriarchal praxis; with its use of chastening, (patriamiseo, patria father + miseo hate; hate of the loving, chastening heavenly father, patriarch). "But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted." Matthew 23:8-12 This liberal bias which permeates the American culture today, made its greatest advance during the 40's and 50's via transformational Marxists, men who came to America in the 30's (the Frankfurt School, Kurt Lewin, J. L. Moreno), men who applied their trafficking before the American citizen had a chance to comprehend the implications of their praxis and properly respond. Under the cover of education, their great experiment, their "re-education" program (washing the next generation's mind of a patriarch paradigm via the use of curriculum change—"paradigm shift"), they produced a nation which now sees all things through a "neo-Marxist lens."
"Liberals tend to view social problems as symptoms of the underlying social structure [as Marx did, to evaluate which paradigm—didactic or dialectic (deductive reasoning or inductive reasoning)— is being used by an individual, or group of individuals, to resolve social conflict], while conservatives view them as results of individual incompetence or immorality [what moral law is the person or group obeying or breaking]. In short, [for the conservative] political problems tend to be seen in moral rather than sociological terms.” “What characterized the left and distinguishes it from the right is the desire for a change, slight or great, in the balance of power [paradigm shift toward Eros].” (Adorno) “Sense experience must be the basis of all science.” Karl Marx "... a science based on an erotic sense of reality.” (Brown) This is the praxis of the "behavioral sciences."
“But science insists that action is initiated by forces impinging upon the individual, and that caprice [impulse, deviancy] is only another name for behavior for which we have not yet found a cause.” (Carl Rogers On Becoming a Person) This observation by Rogers has a dark side to it. Therefore deviancy becomes the norm. According to counseling methods used today there are two types of deviants. There are deviants who do not fit in with the group because of pre-set standards they have embraced, standards which defining deviant human behavior as evil—"The personal conscience is the key element in ensuring self-control, refraining from deviant behavior even when it can be easily perpetrated.” (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz The meaning of “Community” in Community Policing)—and there are deviant behaviors which are common to man which the group can embrace through the praxis of consensus. "... deviants because of their interpersonal behavior in the group sessions and not because of a deviant life style or past history. There is no type of past behavior too deviant for a group to accept once therapeutic group norms are established." (Yalom) If the deviant (patriarch—one who gets support and guidance outside the group) does not join with the deviant (heresiarch—those who identify and praxis common Eros in the group) then the deviant (patriarch) is identified as a deviant (not one of us) and excluded. With this outcome, Eros rules—as it did in the days of Noah.
Feuerbach Thesis #11 Karl Marx
The first thesis of Marx's 11 Feuerbach Thesis' reads: “Feuerbach does not understand human activity itself as objective activity [man's carnal nature, his common Eros must be recognized as God (the object in praxis must be man and not God) ''... man is the supreme being for man." (Karl Marx Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right' ) “Spirit, in so far as it is the Spirit of God, is not a spirit beyond the stars, beyond the world. On the contrary, God is present, omnipresent, and exists as spirit in all spirits.” (Hegel Philosophy of Religion)], as human sense activity, as practical activity, subjectively [man needs to see his sensual praxis—pleasure of self expressed (Orpheus) and pleasure of self in others (Narcissus) actualized —as godlike, and worship that which is common to all men “The person at the peak experience is godlike . . . complete, loving, uncondemning, compassionate and accepting of the world and of the person.” (Abraham Maslow Toward a Psychology of Being)]. He [Feuerbach] therefore does not grasp the significance of ‘revolutionary,’ ‘practical-critical’ activity [death to God and the traditional home through critical discourse, "critical theory"—euphemism for Marxist theory i.e. "Question authority." Questioning everything except the process that is].” (Karl Marx Thesis on Feuerbach # 1 emphasis added) “In fact, it is probably fair to say that Erich Fromm’s Marx’s Concept of Man introduced the young Marx to America and provided the dominant interpretation of this thinker for the students of the New Left.” The pot smokers of the 60's have traded in their VW's and beads for Mercedes Benz and polo shirts and now seek, along with their offspring (figuratively speaking), to change and control our lives from the schools to the highest offices in our land. “…Fromm gave the humanitarian, idealist, and romantic proponents of the New Left a Marx they could love.” (Bronner) “The more of himself man attributes to God, the less he has left in himself .” (Karl Marx) The more man sets his mind on things above, the less he sets his mind on things below. The more spiritual he is the less Eros he is.
"If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth." Colossians 3:1, 2
"For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." Romans 8:6-14
“The life which he has given to the object sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." Karl Marx
The key to understanding the purpose of sensitivity training is understanding what Karl Marx meant by the statement quoted above. First: "The life which he has given to the object". Obeying parents "legitimizes" their office above children and leads to the praxis of obeying God which "legitimizes" his office above mankind. By the children submitting to the parent and thus to God, both God and parents are "given" the right to chasten their children when they disobey rules the parent or God arbitrarily (in the eyes of the disobedient child) establish as improper behavior. This praxis sets the parent above the child and separates the child from the parent causing alienation—"the object [the parent] sets itself against him [the child] as an alien and hostile force." The Marxist, Kurt Lewin, while a professor in Iowa, wrote “The negative valence of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child thus usually derives from an induced field of force of an adult." (Kurt Lewin; A Dynamic Theory of Personality, 1935) In other words the parent punishes the child ("induced field of force of an adult") for seeking something in nature, something which would "naturally" satisfy the child's nature (an "object which in itself attracts the child") which the parent has forbidden ("forbidden object"), thus causing standards of restraint against human nature ("negative valence"). When the children submits to the parent (when the adolescent submits to the patriarch, when the proletariat submit to the bourgeoisie) and their commands, the children's mind and behavior is prejudiced to accept their parent's paradigm (the adolescent's mind and behavior is prejudiced to accept the patriarch's paradigm, the proletariat's mind and behavior is prejudiced to accept the bourgeoisie's paradigm) with its rules over human nature through its control of natural resources. When the children eventually become adults, they praxis their parent's paradigm, and expect and demand the parent's praxis in the community, causing division, alienation, and therefore hostilities in the community, especially towards those with liberalizing carnal natures—socialists, globalists, environmentalists, i.e. all those who facilitate to a consensus, all those who praxis a dialectical paradigm.
The solution according to Lewin was "If this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his authority) the negative valence also disappears.” If an environment could be constructed ("If you build it they will come.") in which decisions could be made with freedom of mind and behavior, with no fear of reprisal ("this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child") the paradigm of the parent, of the bourgeoisie, of the patriarch, of God would be negated along with his rules of "proper" conduct ("the negative valence also disappears.")—no longer recognized as viable—thereby annihilating the traditional home with its patriarchal environment and thus "Fear of God is dead." The humanist "right of the child"—Eros and "incest"—thus negates (commits "patricide") the God given right of the parent—"trust and obey." The facilitator finds the child's "will" and the parent's "will," and then gets both to focus on the "will" they have in common. By doing so the parent will "willingly" negate any "will" above him and the child; your "representative" will "willingly" negate any "constituent's will" for the "will" of the subcommittee which arrives at consensus, etc. This units all on the "child within," whom we all love—in our carnal nature. We therefore, "willingly," rally around our common Eros—consensus. "Can't you feel the warmth." Children naturally want to be hugged, not chastened. Get rid of the chastening and we can all get a big hug, as well as give one. This process even works in the "Church." “Change in organization [paradigm shift] can be derived from the overlapping between play [Eros] and barrier [patriarchal] behavior. To be governed by two strong goals [obey God and be approved by others] is equivalent to the existence of two conflicting controlling heads within the organism. The forces under the control of one head have to counteract the forces of the other before they are effective [pleasure has to counteract obedience, which requires self justification, a rational praxis or obedience has to counteract pleasure, which requires denying pleasure, a "non-rational" praxis—faith. "But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Hebrews 11:6].” (Kurt Lewin Frustration and Regression) Choose today who you will serve: God or man.
Alienation: the byproduct of a patriarchal paradigm
“God's work is a source of corruptions in
John Dewey Democracy and Education 1919
“Alienation has a long history. Its most radical sense already appears in the biblical expulsion from Eden.” “Alienation is the experience of ‘estrangement’ (Verfremdung) from others, . . .” “The first systematic encounter with alienation, however, occurred in the writings of Hegel.” “Every form of objectification [recognition of God above man's desires, the father as head of family, the boss over the workers, teacher to inculcate the pupil, etc.]... results in alienation [separates children and adults from other children and adults because they believe or behave contrary to "acceptable" standards set by higher authority—who liberals call "authoritarians"].” “Transcending alienation involves transcending objectification [transcending accepting God and parents as final authority—obeying their laws and expecting others to do likewise, causing severance from others; “Laws must not fetter human life; but yield to it; they must change as the needs and capacities of the people change.” (Karl Marx).].” “Abolishing alienation is less a matter of overcoming capitalism than of redeeming the miseries of history [the "miseries of history," the "neurosis of history" is having to obey authority unquestionable against ones desires, ones senses; "Tillich suggests that it would be better to let the giver of arbitrary laws to destroy us physically than to accept the psychological destruction that would accompany submission to an alien will." (Leonard Wheat Paul Tillich's Dialectical Humanism)]; ...” “Alienation, according to Feuerbach, derives from the externalization (Entausserung) of human powers and possibilities upon a non-existent entity: God. God is thus the anthropological source of alienation . . .[having to obey a voice above common human praxis, causes division, this is the "logic" of carnal fallen man].” (Bronner)
“This voice which really isn’t you but tells you the way the world works is a direct attack on creativity. We have to work to remove it.” (Abraham Maslow Maslow on Management quoting Michael Ray), “Alienation is a felt need which is not invalidated even when attempts to fulfill it are made in the most ideologically tainted ways [we all carry in this life the "laws of the flesh." The Apostle Paul wrote: "So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin." Romans 7:18, 25].” “Alienation will continue so long as the subject engages in an externalization (Entausserung) of his or her subjectivity [seeking identity and purpose from above (outside) of common human experience, above the "law of sin."].” “The use of ‘critical theory’ [Marxist Theory] as a code word, which already becomes evident in Horkheimer’s early writings, enabled a certain interpretation of Marxism to enter academic discourse.”
“Horkheimer, especially toward the end of the 1920s, ‘understood himself as an advocate of Marxian theory in the sense that he viewed his position as an extension of a line that went from the French Enlightenment over Hegel and Marx.’” “Work done by Horkheimer in the thirties identified “neurosis as a social product, . . . in which the family was seen as a primary agent of repressive socialization.” (Bronner) According to Horkheimer, the annihilation of the patriarchal paradigm is necessary for world peace and therefore patricide is "justified." “ A detailed theoretical analysis of the relationship between Christianity and anti‑Semitism [both falsely labeled as patriarchal in nature] has been contributed by Max Horkheimer and T. W. Adorno.” (Adorno) This correlation between Christianity and anti-Semitism has been proven irrefutably incorrect but continues as the justification for social reform. This trickery is used to "ethically" cleans the world of a patriarchal paradigm through the use of manipulation on people, getting them to participate in a "paradigm shift" for the purpose of social harmony and peace. This is plain to see when one reads such biased statements (and cyclical reasoning) as follows: “It would then be more understandable why the German family, with its long history of authoritarian, threatening father figures, could become susceptible to a fascist ideology.” (Adorno)
"The transformation of the family's role"
This narrowness of mind is the foundation of liberal bias today. Therefore, for Max Horkheimer and liberals who follow this false information (lies regarded as truth), “The major implication . . . was the transformation of the family’s role in the process of socialization [from a patriarchal into a heresiarchal paradigm, from parent rule (rule from above) to adolescent rule (rule through the group manipulated by a facilitator].” (Jay) The greatest obstacle to globalism is the individual with his strong conscience, the result of a patriarchal home, with a patriarchal faith. “Protestantism was the strongest force in the extension of cold rational individualism.” (Max Horkheimer Vernunft and Selbsterhaltung) This would be so much unnecessary information if it was not for the sad fact that during the 40's and 50's Horkheimer and his comrades directed major reform programs in American education, government, works projects, etc, directly out of Washington D. C. as well as throughout our nation using our universities. Our tax dollars wholeheartedly support these heresiarchal programs today. Our tax dollars are dedicated to pushing and sustaining their liberal agenda, the dialectical paradigm, into every American home, via entertainment, education, work, government, and even the church. All must participate. The process is not successful until no one can escape.
“For a state to become a state it is necessary that the citizen cannot continually think of emigrating, but that the class of cultivators, no longer able to push to the outside, presses upon itself and is gathered into cities and urban professions. For a real state and a real government only develop when there is a difference of classes, when riches and poverty become very large and a situation arises where a great number of people can no longer satisfy its needs in the accustomed way.” G. W. F. Hegel
When sensitivity training enters the public realm it mandates a neutralization, marginalization, and an eventually annihilation of that which is sacred, sacred being that praxis which unquestionably (in faith) obeys higher authority, any patriarchal institution, against one's natural desires—all earthly authority, from parent to President, evaluated from God's word. By the mingling of sacred and secular, public and private, through collective discourse (“The institutions in socialist society which act as the facilitators between the public and private realms are the Soviets.” Norman Lavine, George Lukacs Process of Democratization ed. by Norman Lavine), the sacred (the private) is always annihilated both "in theory and in practice." According to Karl Marx's "categorical imperative," the patriarchal paradigm must be "annihilated," "in theory and in practice." “The critique of religion ends with the categorical imperative to overthrow all conditions in which man is a debased, enslaved, neglected, contemptible [wicked] being.” (Karl Marx Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right) These are conditions liberals and sulking children see as the result of unquestioned obedience toward God, parent, King, etc. Once sacred enters discourse with secular, sacred loses its "religious foundation." Three cheers to Karl Marx. Three cheers to Sigmund Freud. This is the agenda of sensitivity training. It is so effective that even conservatives today will "glaze over" when warned of the risks associated with its use. "It just feels to good to be evil. Surely there is some good parts of it we can use." That is how the dialectical road always "feels" when one starts down it—Eros is calling, and even the "church" is responding. "There is a way [road or pathway] that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25 Even the neo-Marxist Abraham Maslow recognized the damage this dialectical praxis was doing when, as he put it, "his children got him into conflict with his theory." “Who should teach whom?” he wrote, “I’ve been in continuous conflict over this Esalen-type, orgiastic, Dionysian-type education.” (Abraham Maslow The Journals of Abraham Maslow, ed. Richard J. Lowry, p. 132. June 1982) Notice his own description of the social reform he propagated into the American culture, he called it by its proper name an "Orgiastic, Dionysian-type education."
top of page
Two Roads: Didactic or Dialectic and their praxis: Part II
To obey (disobey) or to circumvent?—that is the question.
by Dean Gotcher
All [ brackets ] below mean emphasis, quotations, or information has been added within a quotation.
top of page
Two Roads: Didactic or Dialectic and their praxis: Part I
Two Roads: Didactic or Dialectic and their praxis: Part II
Bibles of the 60's: Eros and Civilization, Life against Death
Consensus is Materialistic Ethics—Democratic Ethics
The Power to Tax is the Power to Destroy!
Are you standing in the way?
The pathway to "peace:" the "logical outgrowth" of diaprax
God is conceived
The Enemy Within
The annihilation of the traditional home. The emancipation of hedonism.
"Will the real Sigmund Freud please step forward."
The "animalization" of the traditional home. Redefining man as a "social animal."
Promises or the lack thereof
Except ye become as little children
Dad and mom may not be perfect but the office is.
The Sexual Revolution
Some of my sources
Bibles of the 60's: Eros and Civilization, Life against Death
Two books, Eros and Civilization, by Herbert Marcuse and Life against Death, by Norman O. Brown, are known as the bibles of the 60's. They go into great detail explaining the theory and practice of sensitivity training. Both men sought to justify the synthesis of Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx, i.e. socio-psychology. For example, Freud, according to Marcuse, saw the same relationship between the individual and society as did Marx. Marx wrote: “It is not individualism that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities… only in a socialist society.” Source: Phil Worts presentation on COPS Marcuse wrote: “Freud’s theory is in its very substance ‘sociological.’” (Marcuse) Marcuse, quoting Freud, wrote: “Individual psychology is thus in itself group psychology ... the individual ... is an archaic identity with the species.” “This archaic heritage bridges the ‘gap between individual and mass psychology.’” (Freud, Moses and Monotheism in Marcuse) According to his book, Moses and Monotheism, Freud believed Moses was an Egyptian, who worshiped a sun-disc deity, was killed by the Israelites (out of fear of "castration"—due to the bondage of the Law), who then wrote the Bible and exonerated Moses out of a guilty conscience—producing a religion of "neurosis." Having escaped the patriarch—non-human law, instead of realizing their freedom in themselves—human law, they, out of a guilty conscience, restored the patriarchal paradigm—non-human law. To escape from the Bible as the Word of God, it was now to be used as a means to understanding mans psyche, as it is evaluated through the life experience of the group, through therapy—social praxis. Norman O. Brown wrote the same thing: “The individual is emancipated in the social group.” (Brown) Since it is built upon Marx and Freud, socio-psychology propagandized their secular conviction, religiously. "The relation of theory to therapy is just as constitutive for Freudian theory as the relation of theory to praxis is for Marxist theory." (Jürgen Habermas Theory and Practice)
"With the devaluation of the epistemic authority of the God’s eye view, moral commands lose their religious as well as their metaphysical foundation." Jürgen Habermas 1998 Communicative Ethics The inclusion of the Other. Studies in Political Theory.
At the heart of the profession of socio-psychology is the conquest of religion (objectification—any authority above man, demanding trust and obedience) and its "aroma"—the conscience. “The struggle against religion is therefore indirectly a struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.” Karl Marx MEGA I/1/1 Karl Marx wrote: “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.” “The critique of religion is the prerequisite of every critique.” “The critique of religion ends with the categorical imperative to overthrow all conditions in which man is a debased, enslaved, neglected, contemptible being.” “The critique of religion ends in the doctrine that man is the supreme being for man;” Karl Marx “Freud speaks of religion as a ‘substitute-gratification’– the Freudian analogue to the Marxian formula, ‘opiate of the people.’" “If there is a universal neurosis, it is reasonable to suppose that its core is religion.... Psychoanalysis must treat religion as a neurosis.” (Brown) “. . . Definition of religious experience as experience of absolute dependence is the definition of the masochistic experience in general.” (Erich Fromm Escape from Freedom) “Freud ... stressed the role of religion in the historical deflection of energy from the real improvement of the human condition to an imaginary world of eternal salvation...." (Marcuse)
In his book, The Future of an Illusion, Freud "... praised science and scientific reason as the great liberating antagonist of religion.” (Marcuse) “Sense experience must be the basis of all science. Science is only genuine science when it proceeds from sense experience, in the two forms of sense perception and sensuous need, that is, only when it proceeds from Nature.” Karl Marx [bold added] “The Christian religion has been deeply affected by the process of Enlightenment [“The ideas of the Enlightenment taught man that he could trust his own reason as a guide to establishing valid ethical norms and that he could rely on himself, needing neither revelation nor that authority of the church in order to know good and evil.” (Bronner)] and the conquest of the scientific spirit.” (Adorno) “We must ultimately assume at the highest theoretical levels of enlightenment management theory, a preference or a tendency.” “. . . to identify with more and more of the world, moving toward the ultimate of mysticism, a fusion with the world, or peak experience, cosmic consciousness, etc.” (Abraham Maslow Maslow on Management) “Neither the Bible nor the prophets – neither Freud nor research – neither the revelations of God nor man – can take precedence over my own direct experience. Experience is, for me, the highest authority.” (Rogers) With this combination of personalities (Freud— psychology, and Marx—sociology) there is an underlining unanimity, the dialectical process. "Psychoanalysis, ... and Marx. Common to all of them is a mode of consciousness that can be called the dialectic imagination.” (Brown)
"History, almost universally, has dichotomized this higher & lower, but it is now clear that they are on the same continuum, in a hierarchical-integration of prepotency & postpotency."
Abraham Maslow (ed. by Lowery) The Journals of Abraham Maslow
The best place to go to understanding the dialectical process is Genesis 3:1-6. Sensitivity training is the Garden in Eden experience, the dialectical imagination, in praxis. Both authors, Marcuse and Brown, testify to the use of this diabolical praxis in the garden in Eden: “If the guilt accumulated in the civilized domination of man by man can ever be redeemed by freedom [freedom from a patriarchal family and a patriarchal God], then the ‘original sin’ must be committed again: ‘We must again eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence.” (Marcuse) “To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit; and this book cannot without sinning communicate that experience to the reader." (Brown) Erick Fromm, in his book You Shall Be As Gods, wrote: “In the process of history man gives birth to himself. He becomes what he potentially is, and he attains what the serpent—the symbol of wisdom and rebellion—promised, and what the patriarchal, jealous God of Adam did not wish: that man would become like God himself.” (p. 123) He believed that Adam and Eve were animals, intrinsically a part of nature but not aware of it, until they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Then, because of their ability of rational though, be became aware of their humanity, vulnerability, and severance from nature. In the guilt of self consciousness, they clothed themselves—resulting in what I label a self-environmental dialectical rift (a Godless, anti-patriarchal praxis), a "cultural neurosis." Supposedly it is only through Adam and Eve's praxis of enlightenment, man uniting with man and nature through inductive reasoning, seeking reunite through "realistic" Eros, redemption from his internal angst can be actualized—the praxis of the "imagination of the heart." It was because of this dialectical praxis that God flooded the world with water. This praxis is back. It is even in the church (the Apostate church). God's judgment is coming again, but this time it will be by fire.
"Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment. Therefore remove sorrow from thy heart, and put away evil from thy flesh: for childhood and youth are vanity." Ecclesiastes 11:9, 10
Marcuse wrote “This dialectic
constitutes the unexplored and tabooed core of Freud’s metapsychology.”
“The gratification of non-procreative genitality are ... tabooed as
perversions...” “... perversions ... the sex instincts ... which do not
serve or prepare for the procreative function.” “sexuality is by nature
Brown wrote “Children are polymorphously perverse. . . . by the
standards of normal adult sexuality.” “Fore-pleasure is the preliminary play
with all parts of the body, and represent a perpetuation of the pure
polymorphous perverse play of infantile sexuality.” “The ‘magical’ body of
occidental mysticism, and the ‘diamond’ body of oriental mysticisms, and, in
psychoanalysis, the polymorphously perverse body of childhood.” “Infantile
sexuality is the pursuit of pleasure obtained through the activity of any and
all organs of the human body
['touching, seeing, muscular activity, pain, etc.'].”
In explaining Freud, Marcuse wrote: “If Freud’s hypothesis is not corroborated by any anthropological evidence, it would have to be discarded altogether ... except for the fact that it telescopes, in a sequence of catastrophic events, the historical dialectic of domination ... elicits aspects of civilization hitherto unexplained.” “... the Freudian hypothesis ... does not lead back to the image of a paradise which man has forfeited by his sin against God ...” “[... the Freudian hypothesis leads] to the domination of man by man.” (Marcuse) “In Eclipse of Reason Horkheimer ─ ‘this mentality of man as the master can be traced back to the first chapters of Genesis.’” (Jay) Marcuse wrote Eros and Civilization to legitimize Freud's dream of an un-repressed civilization, a civilization no longer under Godly restraint, no longer under "domination," a condition Marx labeled as repression, alienation, and reification, caused by an "opiate"—patriarchal religion—a way of thinking which Freud saw as the source of neurosis (those who concede to accept external domination as a way of life). “. . . Definition of religious experience as experience of absolute dependence is the definition of the masochistic experience in general.” “Both the sadistic [*] and the masochistic [*] trends are caused by the inability of the isolated individual to stand alone and his need for a symbiotic relationship to overcome this aloneness.” [Fromm believed that man could] "not take the last logical step, to give up 'God' and to establish a concept of man as a being who is alone in the world, but who can feel at home in it if he achieves union with his fellow man and with nature." [In other words, the German people could give up God but they could not, out of the fear of loneliness, give up Hitler. They had not learned that their escape from loneness was to be found in union with mankind and nature.] (Erich Fromm Escape from Freedom, brackets added) [*] Our dictionaries carry the influence of this Freudian ideology: Masochism: "a sexual perversion characterized by pleasure in being subjected to pain or humiliation especially by a love object;" Sadism "a sexual perversion in which gratification is obtained by the infliction of physical or mental pain on ... a love object" Merriam-Webster Dictionary (emphasis added) In other words, by a dialectical definition, a masochist is anyone who willfully obeys their parents', Gods', etc. command, when the command interferes with their natural, carnal (sexual) desire (according to Freud all desires, including children's desires, are sexual), and a sadist is a parent, God, etc., who places a command upon another person, a command which block their satisfying of a natural, carnal (sexual) desire.
"When I thought to know this, it was too painful for me; Until I went into the sanctuary of God; then understood I their end.
Surely thou didst set them in slippery places: thou castedst them down into destruction. How are they brought into desolation, as in a moment! they are utterly consumed with terrors. As a dream when one awaketh; so, O Lord, when thou awakest, thou shalt despise their image.
Whom have I in heaven but thee? and there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee. My flesh and my heart faileth: but God is the strength of my heart, and my portion for ever. For, lo, they that are far from thee shall perish: thou hast destroyed all them that go a whoring from thee. But it is good for me to draw near to God: I have put my trust in the Lord GOD, that I may declare all thy works." Psalms 73:16-20, 25-28
Fromm was a member of the The Institute of Social Research, a Marxist organization which came to the United States of America in the early 30's (read their history, up to the 50's, in Martin Jay's book The Dialectical Imagination). Fromm wrote his book, Escape from Freedom, about the German people's unwillingness to continue on into what is called by some today "group think" (Socialist-Communist-Globalism-Environmentalism)—"village think." When the German people had rejected believing in a God above mankind, keeping the same patriarchal paradigm in place, they replaced him with a man below. They replacing a spiritual patriarch with a temporal patriarch, and "escaped" their "freedom" from a patriarchal paradigm. They refused or could not do a "paradigm shift" without assistance in breaking free from the rigidity of obedience to higher authority, starting in the home and ending under Hitler. They did not fulfill their freedom, which is only found in mankind and nature, "free to" praxis "incest," which can only be realized when one is "free from" patriarchal authority, externally and internally, achieved when one is "free to" praxis "patricide." “What we call ‘character’ is really a disorganization or malfunctioning of the body. . . . mascular rigidities protect itself from erotic exuberance.” (Brown) It is in an environment of chaos, confusion, and aloneness people have to be helped out of their patriarchal (fascist) paradigm, of course they must be helped by those who praxis the diabolical dialectical process—"change agents," facilitators. Fromm wrote: “We are proud that in his conduct of life man has become free from external authorities, which tell him what to do and what not to do.” “Man is free from all ties binding him to spiritual authorities, but this very freedom leaves him alone and anxious, overwhelms him with a feeling of his own individual insignificance and powerlessness.” (Fromm) Therefore, according to Fromm and all of social-psychology, man needs psychotherapy.
“Freud, Hegel, and Nietzsche are, like Marx, compelled to postulate external domination and its assertion by force in order to explain repression.... Therefore the question confronting mankind is the abolition of repression – in traditional Christian language, the resurrection of the body. The resurrection of the body is a social project.” (Brown)
Consensus is Materialistic Ethics—Democratic Ethics
“. . .we will inevitably find ourselves moving toward the chosen goal, and probably thinking that we ourselves desired it. …it appears that some form of completely controlled society … is coming.” (Rogers)
As Marx "demythologized" Hegel, Marcuse "demythologized" Freud, rescuing Freud from his despair since he could not grasp a pathway in which to realize his dream of an un-repressed civilization. With the release of Eros, all Freud could see was the "explosion" of civilization, a return to barbarism; "instinctual liberation (and consequently total liberation) would explode civilization itself, ... freed from constraints ... man ... without work and order ... would fall back into nature ... destroy[ing] culture.” (Marcuse) Using Kant, the Marcuse attempted to deliver Freud from his mythological "error." His dialectical pathway around the "explosion" of civilization was to actualize in civilization a taxonomical awareness “from sexuality constrained under genital supremacy to eroticisation of the entire personality” to bring Eros into Civilization, into the workplace. Marcuse wrote: “To meet this argument, we recalled certain archetypes of imagination” a word he freely interchanged with "phantasy," “uniting the whole person, the universal and particular under pleasure ... reconciliation of the individual with the whole, of desire with realization, of happiness with reason ... the fulfillment of man and nature, not through domination and exploitation, but through release of inherent libidinal forces [laws of the flesh].” (Marcuse)
The Power to Tax is the Power to Destroy!
“Education must be eupsychian or else it is not democratic." "In a democratic society a patriarchal culture should make us depressed instead of glad; it is an argument against the higher possibilities of human nature, of self actualization ["Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." Abraham Maslow The Further Reaches of Human Nature]. In our democratic society, any enterprise--any individual--has its obligations to the whole. Any company that restricts its goals purely to its own profits, its own production, and its own sales is getting a kind of a free ride from me and other taxpayers. Tax credits would be given to the company that helps to improve the whole society, and helps to improve the democracy by helping to create democratic individuals. [The] goal is simply to build group companies where people can self-actualize." (Abraham Maslow Maslow on Management)
"I’ve decided to get into the World Federalists, become pro-UN . . . One World. A world government with world-shared values . . . Until sovereignty is given up little by little by 'nations.' This is a realistic combination of the Marxian version and the Humanistic." (The Journals of Abraham Maslow, ed. Richard J. Lowry, p. 132. June 1982)
According to the teachings of methodology in social sciences, the acquisition of one kind of knowledge springs from the dialectical relationship between new information (stimulus) and the total of already existing knowledge; the incorporation, that is, of new knowledge results from the intellectual clash of the new with the old. (Jean Kontaxopoulos Orpheus Introspecting: Tennessee Williams and Jean Cocteau)
“In the words of Thoreau: ‘We need pray for no higher heaven than the pure senses can furnish, a purely sensuous life. Our present senses are but rudiments of what they are destined to become.’” (Brown)
Norman O. Brown writes: “The basic structure of Freud’s thought is committed to dialectics.” “His finest insights are incurably ‘dialectical.’” Brown, like Marcuse, saw the common ground between Marx and Freud, the dialectical process, the liberating of mankind from any voice above himself, including his own voice apart from the voice of others. Karl Marx defined the dialectical process: “In the eyes of dialectical philosophy, nothing is established for all times, nothing is absolute or sacred.” (Marx) According to the Marxist, Antonio Gramsci, truth is to be found in "a moment in correct praxis"—sensuous truth, actualized in the "group hug," consensus experience. Therefore, all is uncertainty. To arrive at any sense of order for the moment, an inductive analysis of the situation must be conducted. Any act of deductive reasoning, any evaluation of the current situation from an a priori, any statement of certainty, any truth which causes group division, must be treated as an opinion, or else domination, repression, and objectification continues to exist. Absolute truth must be treated as a theory, as an opinion, [“The scientific study of ideology can only be made on the basis of theory (treat every truth as an opinion).” (Adorno) “... to grasp philosophies and other ideological systems in theory as realities and to treat them as such in praxis (don't reject the person with truth, just recognize he is "deceived" into thinking truth is and treat him as someone who is mislead, who is in "denial").” (Karl Korsch quoted in Bronner)], and a theory, "group think," an opinion must be treated with respect as a fact, otherwise the group can not "think," it can not innovate, it can not change. Ironically this very thinking would negate its own self, something liberals have a difficulty understanding. Anytime you bring a liberal to an absolute truth they always accuse you of being argumentative and not worth listening to, since they have listening skills. Therefore it is understood that you do not know how to listen. Their ears are trained to listen for compromise, compromise which makes everyone "feel" good (dialectical praxis). They have been re-educated (term used for brainwashed in Communist countries) on how to listen for the truth which divides (didactic praxis), and on how to neutralize, marginalize and eradicate those who praxis it. They are listening to "mother earth" below while a believer is listening to God above.
Martin Luther King Jr. in Strength to Love explained the dialectic this way: “The philosopher Hegel said that truth is found neither in the thesis nor the antithesis, but in an emerging synthesis which reconciles the two.” (It is Fichte who uses the words thesis, antithesis, and synthesis which are only understood and not often used by Hegel in his writings.) Norman O. Brown defined the dialectical process this way: “By ‘dialectical’ I mean an act of consciousness struggling to circumvent the limitations imposed by the formal-logical law of contradiction." "an act of consciousness struggling to circumvent," the objective is not to disobey, which leaves the formal-logical law of contradiction in place. The objective is to circumvent: The phrase "... the formal-logical law of contradiction" means a command by God or parent or boss, etc., (backed with force or threat of force). Absolute truth is always formal, not swayed by feelings. It is always logical. It may not make sense in the moment, but at the end of the day or life, with all evidence present, it will make sense. "If A equals B, and B equals C, then A equals C" did not make sense the first time I heard it, but after proper thought, which took a while, it did. Syllogisms force you to think things through with "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." Logical law of contradiction is truth which challenges a persons current, "here and now," feelings or opinions, conflicts with their "felt" needs of the moment.
“Impulse, the primary fact, back of which, psychically we cannot go.”
John Dewey, “Social Psychology,” Psychological Review, I (July, 1894), p. 404
According to Freud this type of command generates behavior which blocks mankind's natural inclination, his id, his true identity (impulses of the moment). The issue was not to disobey God or parent, which would simply leave God and the parent in a position of authority and the guilty conscience intact, it was necessary to both negate the authority figure (praxis patricide) as well as to negate the conscience (treat all ideals as theory), making the authority figure and his commands immaterial (non-sense, anything which can not relate to the senses in the moment. That which is revelation is non-sensuous in the here and now.) and therefore irrelevant in the light of the changing times, the "felt" needs of the moment. In the UN document, Tensions That Cause War, there is presented the case for informal, face to face meetings, where it is known that all who represent their country automatically sacrifice their nation's sovereignty for the representatives personal "felt" needs of the moment. Thus the nation's sovereignty is negated in the informal, face to face praxis. This environment is treasonous to a patriarchal paradigm. "Evil company corrupts good morals." Evil is no longer defined by standards above a man but now is found in man's behavior toward man. Any standard which divides man (i.e. any standard above man, any standard above "we think") is perceived as evil. "Human evil is an acquired or reactive kind of response to bad treatment of the individual [having to obey God or parent against one's carnal desires]. At least this is what the Third Force psychologists generally agree upon." (Abraham Maslow Maslow on Management)
"Philosophy is a free and not self-seeking activity, … This activity contains the essential element of a negation, because to produce is also to destroy; … as Mind passes on from its natural form, it also proceeds from its exact code of morals and the robustness of life to reflection and conception. The result of this is that it lays hold of and troubles this real, substantial kind of existence, this morality and faith, and thus the period of destruction commences." "It may be said that Philosophy first commences when a race for the most part has left its concrete life, when separation and change of class have begun, and the people approach toward their fall; when a gulf has arisen between inward strivings and external reality, and the old forms of Religion, &c., are no longer satisfying; when Mind manifests indifference to its living existence or rests unsatisfied therein, and moral life becomes dissolved." "Then it is that Mind takes refuge in the clear space of thought to create for itself a kingdom of thought in opposition to the world of actuality, and Philosophy is the reconciliation following upon the destruction of that real world which thought has begun." (Hegel’s Lectures on the History of Philosophy Introduction B. Relation of Philosophy to Other Departments of Knowledge.)
Negation, not disobedience, is the diaprax pathway. The former annihilates the patriarch, the latter simply separates from it, leaving it still in existence and therefore in potential power—a "potential fascist." “The task of fascist propaganda is rendered easier to the degree that antidemocratic potentials [obedience to higher authority] already exist in the great mass of people.” (Adorno) James Borchert's audios on Romans 13, regarding government and religious authority, corrects this false assumption.
If the praxis of synthesis—consensus—can be "justified" in the moment
the praxis of antithesis—obedience/disobedience—is "circumvented."
The key to the dialectic's success is the praxis of "circumvention"—"Bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making ..." (Irvin Laszlo A Strategy for the Future: The Systems Approach to World Order) This is a common practice (praxis) used by parents today, who, instead of chastening their child when their child seeks (lusts) after things forbidden, redirect their child's energy, leaving Eros in place, simply redirecting it to some "useful" or at least "harmless" outcome. The children then learn that as long as Eros is rational or practical it is acceptable behavior, that an emerging synthesis (discursive reason with self and others) of one's desire for Eros and the "moral" implications toward others. What is good and what is evil in the group's (the village's) eyes, through consensus, is where "truth" is actualized. Notice the praxis Satan seduced Eve with in the Garden in Eden: The tree of knowledge of good and evil was harmless, in the eyes of Eve and Adam, once the fear of God "you will die," the voice from above, was negated. The shift from patriarchal (obey) paradigm to a heresiarchal (change) paradigm, based upon perception (the mind justifying the senses), the circumvention (negation) of a patriarchal paradigm, the "Bypassing" of "the traditional channels of top-down decision making" was complete, for the moment that is. The next problem to deal with was the guilty conscience. Then God showed up.
The "circumvention," "the bypassing ... top-down decision making" is Satan's paradigm—the use of discourse to liberate opinions of negative patriarchal elements for the sake of self-actualization, as done in the Garden in Eden. Brown noted that "the key to the nature of dialectical thinking may lie in psychoanalysis, more specifically in Freud’s psychoanalysis of negation." "Psychoanalysis, mysticism, poetry, the philosophy of organism, Feuerbach, and Marx. Common to all of them is a mode of consciousness that can be called the dialectic imagination.” “Whitehead constantly draws attention to the dialectical patterns in mystical thought.” It is clear to see the cause of the problems of our culture, including the "contemporary" Church. It is the road, the pathway of pleasure (group approval—the dopamine moment) it has chosen. It has chosen the pathway of questioning authority (evaluating authority's commands, God's word, through group feelings: how others feel, and what they think about God and his word) while seeking to maintain personal Eros and actualize the pleasure of group approval. It has rejected the pathway of righteousness found in God and his word alone. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Exodus 20:3 "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name [Jesus Christ of Nazareth] under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12 (Obedience to authority, Agape, endurance and suffering)
"Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." Hebrews 12:11.
"For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water." (Jeremiah 2:13
"But we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the dead: ... For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world," 2 Corinthians 1:9, 12
L. S. Vygotsky, in his book Mind in Society: the development of higher psychological development wrote “to study something means to study it in the process of change; that is the dialectical method’s basic demand.” "If you don't change, you are going to be left behind" seems to be the banner displayed in every church today. This change is not directed to your heart in relationship to God (repent of your sin—quit your justifying for your justification is found in Christ and in him alone), in other words the crisis of life is not between you and God, but rather the focus is upon relationship with others (situation ethics—justified compromise for your justification is found in what the group thinks, in the consensus) where the crisis of life is between you and others. This shift in crisis is the shift in paradigm. “The eclipse of a way thinking cannot take place without a crisis.” (Antonio Gramsci) The shift in crisis solution (responding to "changing" times) is a change from evaluating the situation from God's position, then repenting and depending upon him, to the evaluating of situations, the crisis of the time, from the group's position, then confessing before others of your individualism (hoarding of resources, including your feelings) and the need for your dependence upon others (the group). The shift is from "But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus." (Philippians 4:19) to the village shall supply all your "felt" needs according to the resources it has at hand (distributed to you according to their perception of your "felt" needs, you hug them and then they hug you, maybe). "Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." Jeremiah 17:5 Many, throughout history, have trusted in the voices of those crying for social change only to find themselves facing a violent death at the hand of those preaching social change. As Norman O. Brown comments "Death can be a learning experience." (Brown)
Are you standing in the way?
Jesus called himself "the way." The early church was called "the way." Both praxised the way of obedience to God, even to death. The "way" being presented today is that of seeking common ground through sensation or feelings (how we make one another feel). Marcuse saw it this way: “... the aesthetic dimension and the corresponding feeling of pleasure ... is the center of the mind ... medium [whereby] nature [ i.e. sensuousness] becomes susceptible to freedom, necessity to autonomy [con-sensuous determined laws, i.e. where sensuousness and morality are synthesized, the emerging synthesis is synergy: "Partnership is the same as synergy. Synergy can be defined as the resolution [synthesis] of the dichotomy between selfishness and unselfishness (altruism)." God says humble and deny yourself—freedom, not to worship or sacrifice yourself—licentiousness or legalism. "The problem for the accountants is to work out some way of putting on the balance sheet the amount of synergy in the organization, the amount of time and money and effort that has been invested in getting groups to work together." (Abraham Maslow Maslow on Management)].” He identified, as did others, that Kant's Critique of Judgment, his aesthetic dimension, was the pathway out from under God's law (seen as repression since there is no intent in diaprax to repent) and the pathway to finding peace in mankind's ever-changing, ever-common laws of the flesh (freedom to be one's self in harmony with others). “These archetypes envisioned the fulfillment of man and nature, not through domination and exploitation, but through release of inherent libidinal forces [the sensations of the flesh: touch, taste, smell, sight, sound].” (Marcuse) Marcuse wrote: “... (O)n the basis of Kant’s theory, the aesthetic function becomes ... the philosophy of culture ... a non-repressive civilization, in which reason is sensuous and sensuousness rational ... [according to Schiller this gives hope to] the possibility of a new reality principle .” From this foundation the transformational Marxists, socio-psychologists, justify their diabolical dialectical praxis. Total Quality Management, Total Quality Leadership, Outcome Based Education, School-to-Work, DARE, COPS, HMO, Church Growth, Emerging Church, etc. are built upon this "secularized Satanism, intellectualized witchcraft," "sin is in!" foundation. Those who follow "the way" of Christ Jesus are standing in the way, standing in the way of the world, that is. The world's attitude is "Come out of your way over onto our way or get out of our way or we will annihilate you." Of course they do it in "love"—Eros that is.
The pathway to "peace"
The "logical outgrowth" of diaprax
It is not how far down the road you have traveled, it is the road that you are on.
"And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not." John 1:5
"Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid." John 14:27
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." Matthew 10:34
"For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape." 1 Thessalonians 5:3
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." Mathew 7: 13, 14
The Tower of Babel and God's obstruction to "peace on
"The dialectical method was overthrown―the parts were prevented from finding their definition within the whole."
Marx The Holy Family
If man is ever to find "freedom," Marcuse believed that the absence of authoritarian domination, judgment, and repression must be actualized in both the individual and society, where both subject (man, children) and object (God, parents) must build relationship through the use of discourse (anti-revelation, anti-Christ), where differing parties must focus on the identification of common "felt" needs, desires, and attributes and common means of "actualizing" them; “... the autonomy of the subject is to have an ‘effect’ in the objective reality, and the ends that the subject sets for itself must be real [attainable by all, i.e. carnal].” This very praxis negates any voice as worthy of consideration if it speaks outside the naturally attainable desires, "felt" needs, of the moment, in other words it must be apprehendable by natural man and can not be above his discursive abilities in the moment—this effectively negates revelation. The child's "Why?" (discourse, pathway toward the satisfaction of sensuous needs, i.e. Eros freedom), to the parent's "Not" (categorical imperative, pathway of Eros repression), must become accepted as "the pathway of deliverance," both for God and man, parent and child, owner and worker, teacher and student etc. (the public private partnership). Any "authority figure" who does not or can not participate in this discourse (willingness to change, to see it differently, to perceive it outside God's, parent's, position) must be regarded as irrational, unreal, and therefore irrelevant. He and his laws (commands) would therefore become negated. This would not only free the "church" from an "autocratic" God, as seen by dialectical minister, but also his autocratic law, freeing man from both the Patriarch (that which is above, external repression of Eros) and his own conscience (that which is below, internal repression of Eros), freeing all from that which is above. Thereby the distinction between sacred and secular become blurred if not moribund.
“God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority.” (Adorno)
"The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents." (Brown) Karl Marx understood this link when he wrote “Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the heavenly family the former must itself be annihilated, both in theory and in practice.” (Karl Marx Feuerbach Thesis #4) In other words, once you realize that the earthly parents, who give commands to their children and chastens them when they disobey, praxis the same paradigm as God, who gives commands to his children and chasten them when they disobey ("Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: For which things’ sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them." Colossians 3:5-7), the traditional parent paradigm must be neutralized, marginalized and removed—annihilated. Since God, to Marx, was illusionary, children must come to see and respond to parental authority as illusionary. This is a praxis (system, practice, purpose) which would eventually destroy the traditionally family paradigm (patricide) and thereby negate a Godly paradigm in the mind of the individual—brainwashing, brain detachment. This would also sanitize the community of any patriarchal praxis, whereby the "village" would refuse its exercise in all policy situations, from the home to the highest political offices. This is the purpose of a soviet system. Thus, any person continuing to praxis a patriarchal paradigm would be considered neurotic. Any effort they might make to support their didactic praxis, by cautioning others of the dialectical praxis, would be seen as divisive. And any effort they would make to propagate the praxis of a patriarchal paradigm—"Do it God's way or else," producing a sense of guilt and fear of judgment upon others—would be seen as an act of hate.
“Freud commented that only through the solidarity of all the participants could the sense of guilt be assuaged.” (Brown)
“It is not individualism that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities… only in a socialist society.” (Karl Marx)
"One of the most fascinating aspects of group therapy is that everyone is born again, born together in the group."
According to Marcuse “... the origin of repression leads back to the origin of instinctual repression ... early childhood.” In other words, the enforced commands of parents (negative force field) repress the child's natural urges which drive him (natural inclination), as the environment draws him (positive force field), into discovering his true identity and purpose in the world, causing a "self-environmental dialectical rift," what Freud called neurosis and Marx called alienation and reification. “... the ‘external restrictions’ which first the parents and then other societal agencies have imposed upon the individual ‘interjected’ into the ego and become its ‘conscience’; henceforth, the sense of guilt permeates the mental life.” “The id carries the memory traces of the dominion ... forward into every present future: it projects the past into the future.” (Marcuse) Brown defined the difference between the conscience and what Freud called the 'super-ego': “What we call ‘conscience’ perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves: the super-ego ‘unites in itself the influences of the present and of the past.’” “Eros is fundamentally a desire for union with objects in the world.” “Eros is the foundation of morality.” (Brown)
While the superego finds morality within social sensuousness (Eros), the conscience finds morality above both individual (self) and societal sensuousness (the environment). The later is caused as a result of a traditional family structure, which must be annihilated for the expressed purpose of initiating and sustaining a world unity and peace built upon Eros—"making love not war." A "change agent" must properly identify what it is he wants to change (or annihilate) before he begins the change process. The following quotation explains what it is that needs to be identified and annihilated if it can not be changed. “Social control is most effective at the individual level. The personal conscience is the key element in ensuring self-control, refraining from deviant behavior even when it can be easily perpetrated.” “The family, the next most important unit affecting social control, is obviously instrumental in the initial formation of the conscience and in the continued reinforcement of the values that encourage law abiding behavior.” “... social control is now often more dependent on external control [the global village (U.N.) and the police state], than on internal self-control [the individual and the family].” (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz The meaning of “Community” in Community Policing) Dr. Trojanowicz was noted for his development of the Community Oriented Police System (COPS), a soviet structured policing procedure, now a standard for police training across America (joining up with homeland security to make sure everyone "feels" safe). He then acknowledges the necessity to place the community between the child and the parent, if a globalization of the community (not his words of course) is to be actualized. "The theme underlying much of the research is that once you can identify a community, you have discovered the primary unity of society ABOVE the level of the individual and the family that can be mobilized to take concerted action to bring about POSITIVE SOCIAL CHANGE." (Trojanowicz) (emphasis added) Thus the individual and the family produces NEGATIVE SOCIAL STABILITY. For more on COPS link to www.crossroad.to/articles2/Community-Policing.htm and read Phil Worts article on the subject. Thus "positive social law" (collective man with his common Eros) determines worth, not a voice above man's common "felt" needs, be it parent or God. No longer God or any objective force (law) above the common human experience is permitted jurisdiction in setting social policy. This is the difference between Lex-Rex and Rex-Lex (law above man—conscience controlling Eros—and man actualizing law—Eros joining with the conscience—which effectively overcomes the conscience: “It is a function of the ego to make peace with conscience, to create a larger synthesis within which conscience, emotional impulses, and self operate in relative harmony.” “When this synthesis is not achieved, the superego has somewhat the role of a foreign body within the personality, and it exhibits those rigid, automatic, and unstable aspects discussed above.” Theodor Adorno The Authoritarian Personality). The difference is between a constitutional republic and a democracy, between rule by principles (Truth) and rule by the "ruck" (feelings) i.e. you either persuade with facts or influence through feelings, by causing a "ruckus."
In the book, which I call "A Cookbook on Humans," Human Relations in Curriculum Change, edited by Kenneth Benne, we find the the outcome of a dialectical praxis, where the man who is based on persuasion (knowing) must be replaced (negated) by the man who is based on influence (thinking through one's feelings). “We must develop persons who see non-influencability of private convictions[*] in joint deliberations as a vice rather than a virtue.” (Benne) * people with principles, not swayed by opinions of men, not moved by "group think," deductive in thought and not easily or quickly moved by inductive "reasoning." (Influence means demonic spirits from the stars.) "The ideal of democratic [globalist, socialist, communist, environmentalist] deliberation is an intelligent and uncoerced [anti-patriarch] consensus concerning what should be done. This consensus will attempt to incorporate the valid [social, materialistic] insights and values of all parties in the conflict. The validity of these various insights and values is to be tested [dialectically evaluated—looked at through "neo-Marxist lens"] by the common study, deliberation, and discussion of the group and ultimately by the consequences of the common plan [negation of patriarchal leadership in setting policy] as it works out in action [sanitization of patriarchal praxis from the social praxis] and as these consequences are evaluated by the common judgment of the group [what the "group thinks"]. It cannot be stressed too emphatically that the ideal goal of democratic co-operation is a consensus in the group concerning what should be done—a consensus based on and sustained by the deliberation of the group in the planning, execution, and evaluation of the common action of the group [a soviet method of policy making-used to neutralize, marginalize and remove patriarchal outcomes]. No other method of social control depends so crucially on the deliberation of the whole group concerned in resolving the conflicts [conflict caused be a "right" vs. "wrong" way of thinking i.e. the conscience] which for the time impede and prevent community of action [commun-ism]. And, as a corollary, no other method of social control depends so centrally for its effective working-out upon the habituation and responsible discipline [brainwashing] of all of its members in conscious methods of deliberation and discussion." (Benne)
The Enemy Within
Trafficking with the enemy
... collaborating with and giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
What every person does when they come to a consensus with a facilitator, over social issues, in a diverse group, seeking common ground through discourse (to praxis a soviet system to solve public-private, individual-social problems).
It is not the problem being solved which is at issue here, it is the paradigm being used to resolve it. Jesus needed food to stay alive, yet he refused to go into discourse with Satan on how to obtain it. He refused to praxis a dialectical, heresiarchal, inductive paradigm. The trickery of those who attempt to initiate and sustain a dialectical paradigm is their relentless effort to inject themselves into the middle of a conflict as agents of mediation between opposing positions for the sake of all parties involved. Without the heat of a crises they can not function in stealth. All have had training in presenting the "appropriate answers" to the "appropriate questions" which guarantee the "appropriate information" being introduced and used in the "group think" meeting, to guarantee the "appropriate method" being used to set policy and make decisions. The "appropriate outcome" is the praxis of the dialectical paradigm, the negation ("annihilation") of a patriarchal paradigm.
A Federally funded book on how this is done reads: A "change agent... should know about the process of change, how it takes place and the attitudes, values and behaviors that usually act as barriers.... He should know who in his system are the 'defenders' or resisters of innovations [innovation is the code word for change of one's paradigm to a dialectical, relativistic, humanistic paradigm." (Ronald Havelock The Change Agents Guide to Innovation in Education 1973) Carl Rogers pushed for the same dialectical paradigm "What we need to learn, it seems, are ways of gaining acceptance for a humanistic person-centered venture in a culture more devoted to rule by authority." (Rogers) FOR THE 80’S in his chapter Some Disappointments in Innovation A Pattern of Failure As Abraham Maslow wrote: "We don’t know the answers to the question: What proportion of the population is irreversibly authoritarian [non-innovative, believers]?" (Abraham Maslow Maslow on Management) The benchmark Federal document, authorizing the criterion for the use of federal grants in all educational institutions, reads: “During the period of innovation, an environment is invisible. The present is always invisible because the whole field of attention is so saturated with it. It becomes visible only when is has been superseded by a new environment [ a new paradigm]." Federal Education Grant, Dec. 1969 Behavior Science in Teacher Education Program p. 237 In Theodor Adorno's book, The Authoritarian Personality, the book used to justify the use of Freud and Marx in the American class room, reads: “Another aspect of traditionalism is the tendency to oppose innovations [change] or alterations of existing politic‑economic forms.” (Adorno)
The profiling of Americans
The two roles of the facilitator are: 1) get everyone to think global—environmental—through the use of global or environmental crisis; 2) get everyone to act local, to question all local authorities who prevent a global focus, to question the authority of those who do not look outside the home, the community, the nation, for answers to their problems, who first look to their heavenly Father and then, politically, to look to anyone in a higher office of authority who likewise seeks after God for direction. These people can be identified through their use of the language of restraint (belief, "mine not yours," "good" vs. "evil") and their use of actions of resistance (patriarchal paradigm). This dialectical agenda is being used all around the world today. The "former" communist nation, Estonia, is using this "new" education program, promoting its globalist agenda (disguised as local). It's rough translation reads:
"Robert Young sees Habermas [*a Marxist-see below] speaking on macroeducational questions and on 'learning levels' of societies and bringing in as the main macroproblem characteristic the problem of difference (that roots in the history of globalisation of culture and communication). This idea corresponds to the idea of Learning Estonia - where the high innovation capacity and integration on the global and local level is one of the key-assumptions. 'But the microproblem is the problem of critique. This problem manifests itself as the problem of interpretation, dialogue and, in some sense 'relatively autonomous', praxis for intellectuals and professionals, including teachers and learners' (Young, p 21). The scenario-development process itself is already appeared to be the strong voice of critique. And as the scenario-studies have become the entire part of different teacher training courses in Tallinn Pedagogical University and in in-service training and in the big projects as 'Quality-School of Estonia' (40 school-teams and 40 consultants), it works in teacher discourse, and shows the signs to become one of narratives to 'approve or try out the direction of progress' in everyday (pedagogical) life." Teacher education in a postmodern society: an Estonian perspective POLITICAL AND SOCIAL TRANSFORMATIONS: ANALYSIS IN NATIONAL CONTEXT Ene-Silvia Sarv from chapter 6. The interpretation of previous as "Estonian Condition of post-modernity," section 6.1. Some short theoretical thoughts
This article also promotes the use of current educational practices in America (dialectical education) as the proper method for globalization. Recognizing Hilda Taba, a Communist from Estonia who became a popular innovator in the globalization (communization) of the America education system, it reads:
"The main ideas of J. Käis pedagogy were 1) integration of the different ideas of western innovative pedagogy into one system; 2) recognition of only such ideas of western innovative pedagogy which can be directly applied in public school. (Inge Unt 'Impact of American Progressive Education on the Didactic system of Johannes Käis. Hilda Taba`s Article 'Governing Directions in American Education' in Jubilee Conference Hilda Taba - 90. Invited Addresses and Reports, Tartu 1992, p 142 - 147, 144). His model to put his innovations into practice involved step-by step movement from idea and its integration into one system to textbooks and worksheets system, actual introduction into school practice via teachers in-service training and feedback system. " ibid
This same agenda is expressed in Richard Paul's works in America: “Only by bringing out the child’s own ideas in dialogical and dialectical settings can the child begin to reconstruct and progressively transcend concepts [to negate the patriarchal paradigm, by questioning their parents authority locally as well as thinking globally, environmentally, cosmically, i.e. thinking "outside the box."].” (Richard Paul Critical Thinking Handbook) Just getting the next generation to rebel against their parents would produce anarchy and destruction. What had to be done at the same time is a re-alignment within groups to a global agenda through discourse on social issues with others outside their home, county, state, and nation. “In fact, a large part of what we call “good teaching” is the teacher’s ability to attain affective objectives through challenging the student’s fixed beliefs [questioning their parents paradigm] and getting them to discuss issues [collective paradigm incorporating views and opinions of others outside ones norm].” (Benjamin Bloom Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2 Affective Domain p. 54) This is something the traditional, patriarchal paradigm would not knowingly permit.
*"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence." "the revolution that must occur is the reaction of suppressed life, which will visit the causality of fate upon the rulers." [patricide; annihilate the patriarchal paradigm] "Therefore the dialectic of the moral life must repeat itself until the materialist spell that is cast upon the reproduction of social life, the Biblical curse of necessary labor, is broken technologically." (Jürgen Habermas Knowledge & Human Interest, 1968, publ. Polity Press, 1987) Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory emphasis added
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Isaiah 5:20
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children." Hosea 4:6
The annihilation of the traditional
The emancipation of hedonism.
(How homosexuality, lesbianism, pedophilia, bestiality, etc. (buggery) is taking over America and the world, with religious support.)
“While adult sexuality serves the socially useful purpose of breeding children, it is for the individual in some sense an end in itself as a source of pleasure – according to Freud, the highest pleasure.” (Brown)
"But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth." Titus 5:6
Marcuse saw a hope, which Freud did not, in how mankind could overcome the repressive cultural condition of domination, a condition which found its origin in obedience to God, the traditional home, and the conscience. “The historical possibility of a gradual decontrolling of the instinctual development [the "decontrolling" of the conscience over the id; i.e. let's be positive (love the creation, love pleasure) and not negative (love the creator, love God)] must be taken seriously, perhaps even the historical necessity – if civilization is to progress to a higher stage of freedom.” (Marcuse). This "higher stage of freedom" carries with it some calamitous concerns for mankind. It carries with it a mandate for the liberation of behavior which God calls abomination: homosexuality, lesbianism, pedophilia, bestiality, all that which is highly esteemed among men. “Non-repressive order is possible only if the sex instincts can generate lasting erotic relations among mature individuals ... a ‘libidinal rationality’ which ... promotes progress toward higher forms of civilized freedom.” "The road to 'higher culture' leads through the true love of boys (όρζως παιδεραστειν)." translated by B. Jowett as "under the influence of true love." Consider the fact that Freud's mythological Greek hero was Orpheus who "... set the example for the people of Thrace of giving his love to tender boys, and enjoyed the springtime and first flower of their growth.'" Orpheus is the Greek figure who represents "... the introduction of homosexuality," the unifying of all things natural. Marcuse “Universal Reconciliation ... relies on a reason that is before reason-mimesis or ‘impulse.’” (Jürgen Habermas The Theory of Communicative Action. 1981, p. 382) “Impulse, the primary fact, back of which, psychically we cannot go.” (John Dewey, “Social Psychology,” Psychological Review, I (July, 1894), p. 404)
"I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God. Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not." John 8: 38-45
"He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father honour." John 12: 25, 26
"For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." Matthew 7:21
"For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." John 12: 49, 50
“‘Every renunciation ... becomes a ... conscience; every fresh abandonment of gratification increases its severity and intolerance ... every impulse of aggression which we omit to gratify is taken over by the super-ego and goes to heighten its aggressiveness (against the ego).’ ‘That which began in relation to the father ends in relation to the community.’” Freud Civilization and Its Discontents, 1949 in Herbert Marcuse's book Eros and Civilization
"And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." John 8:23, 24
In the dialectical praxis, where "as above, so below" and "as below, so above" become actualized, this "higher civilization," as Marcuse calls it, must be grounded not only upon Marx's sociological praxis but also upon Freud's psychological praxis. “Freud ... compares the attitude of civilization toward sexuality.” “... lasting erotic relations among mature individuals ... a ‘libidinal rationality’...” (Marcuse). Freud saw the conflict in civilization as one where sex (the sensuous: touch, taste, sight, smell, sound) plays the determinant agent “‘... The conflict between civilization and sexuality is caused by the circumstance that sexual love is a relationship between two people,...” "'... whereas civilization is founded on relations between large groups of persons. (... the effort) to combine organic substances into ever larger unities,’ to ‘establish ever greater unities and to preserve them thus―in short, to bind together?’” Freud Civilization and Its Discontents (Marcuse). Freud then reveals his true sexual bias: “‘In no other case does Eros so plainly betray the core of his being, his aim of making one out of many; but when he has achieved it in the proverbial way through the love of two human beings, he is not willing to go further.’” ibid. (bold added) In other words a patriarch paradigm (procreation—husband, wife) predominates with mankind and not a matriarchal/heresiarchal paradigm (adulterous-homosexual culture) As Marcuse explains: “... according to Freud, the drive toward ever larger unities belongs to the biological-organic nature of Eros itself.” “This dialectic constitutes the unexplored and tabooed core of Freud’s metapsychology.”
"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." James 1:14-15
"For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin." Romans 7:18, 25
"As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love. These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you." John 15: 9-14
"Will the real Sigmund Freud please step forward."
"Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which
minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith:"
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4
"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. But refuse profane and old wives’ fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness. For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. These things command and teach." 1 Timothy 4:1, 11
The pathway of repression in civilization, according to Freud's fable, is caused by a patriarchal figure. “The primal father, ... the archetype of domination, [who] initiates the chain reaction of enslavement, rebellion, and the reinforced domination which marks the history of civilization.” (Marcuse). According to Freud, the sequence of "historical" events which initiated repression began when the sons sought sexual relations (sensual pleasure: touch, taste, sight, sound, smell—it is important to note this is not for the purpose of procreation, but for the satisfaction of "felt" needs, urges) with their mother (triggering events which led up to the Oedipus complex). According to Marcuse, “... the prehistory of the sense of guilt ... has ‘its origin in the Oedipus complex and was acquired when the father was killed by the association of the brothers.’ [the brotherhood, the fraternity]” According to Freud the sons kill the father to regain sensuous relationship with the mother, which was forbidden by the father, but their praxis of domination produces guilt within them resulting in their establishing laws of "repression" upon themselves and their clan, separating others from gaining sensuous relationship ("self-actualized 'felt' needs") with the mother. As a result civilization was created: "... original domination becomes eternal, cosmic, and good, and in this form guards the process of civilization.” “The ‘historical rights’ of the primal father are restored.” (Marcuse) Supposedly, with the expansion of the guilty conscience, which followed the sons killing of their father, “[t]he despot-patriarch has succeeded in implanting his reality principle in the rebellious sons.” (Brown) The patriarchal paradigm, the father figure (i.e. the top-down husband-wife-children hierarchal institute), the bourgeois (the middle-class establishment), dominate again the matriarchal paradigm, the mother (i.e. mother-earth or natural resources), thereby preventing the heresiarchal paradigm, the adolescent, the proletariat (the lower class), from attaining self-actualization (i.e. the praxis of incest, a sibling-mother orgiastic consensus). Instead of bending your knee before God (fear God) you now bend your knee before the village (fear man) for your daily "felt" needs.
"And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s, the same shall save it. For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels." Mark 8: 34-38
The subconscious memory of Eros seeking actualization; hallucination, to delude, to mislead the mind of judgment, to deceive, trickery.
"But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken
before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;" Jude 1:17
Memory becomes a key factor, either continuing repression-domination or eliminating it, depending upon how memory is defined. According to dialectical reasoning, memory, when applied to the past standards of civilization, it acts as an agent of repression—a negative field of force, but when applied to the present "felt" needs of society, the carnal inclinations of the flesh, the "Great Refusal," the subconscious, which Rogers declared as a positive force, it acts as an agent of "deliverance." It becomes the pathway of salvation. “If the guilt accumulated in the civilized domination of man by man can ever be redeemed by freedom, then the ‘original sin’ must be committed again: ‘We must again eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence." It is the memory of innocence (unrestrained Eros) which draws man again to eat from the forbidden tree. "...the pleasure principle is not redeemed ... liberated [because t]he sense of guilt is sustained...‘the consequence of uncommitted aggression ...,” (Brown) In other words, it is not enough to remove the patriarch from society, his importance, the memory of him as a loving provider and protector, must also be removed (washed) from one's thought process (now labeled as self-seeking, hording, controlling, a dominator, an aggressor, a blocker, a special interest pleader, etc.). Giving him recognition results in the toleration of intolerance (i.e. the acceptance of absolutes, the unquestioned obedience to authority). The "great refusal" (man's carnal nature, the laws of the flesh) triggers the questioning of everything which inhibits its actualization. “Some tolerant people are fighters. . . they are intolerant of intolerance.... Whether the tolerant person is militant or pacifistic, he is very likely to be liberal in his political views.” (Adorno)
With the aid of psychoanalysis, Marcuse saw memory (the "ought"—Eros restrained but subconsciously the desire retained) as an apparatus to be used in assisting mankind out of the repressive standards of the present civilization. “The rediscovered past yields critical standards which are tabooed by the present.” “... the restoration of memory is accompanied by the restoration of the cognitive content of phantasy.” “... psychoanalytic theory recaptures the strict truths of daydreaming and fiction.” "Memory," the law of the flesh, therefore, is an organ of "truth," which remembers currently suppressed carnal urges of past erotic acts of childhood, natural acts which were suppressed by parent standards. Thus it serve as a tool for the therapist, as it did for Satan in the Garden in Eden. “If memory moves into the center of psychoanalysis as a decisive mode of cognition, this is far more than a therapeutic device; the therapeutic role of memory derives from the truth value of memory.” “Its truth value lies in the specific function of memory to preserve promises and potentialities [love and support by the parent and carnal hopes] which are betrayed and even outlawed by the mature, civilized individual, but which he had once been fulfilled in his dim past and which are never entirely forgotten.” “... all thinking ‘is merely a detour from the memory of gratification ... memory of gratification is at the origin of all thinking, and the impulse to recapture past gratification is the hidden driven power behind the process of thought.” (Marcuse). Brown writes about memory as a cause for repression, when it is used to retain patriarchal standards: “The core of the neurosis of individuals lay in the ‘memory-traces of the experiences of former generations.’” All this has changed, as several generations have praxised the dialectical process in their homes. Irvin Yalom writes: "The current generation is the first in the history of the world which has nothing to learn from grandparents;" (Irvin Yalom Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy) Thomas Kuhn writes “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” Kuhn quoting Max Planck’s famous dictum. (Thomas Kuhn The Structure of Scientific Revolution)
Excerpts from the mind of Freud reveal the use of phantasy as a tool to activate "memory" “‘... phantasies of all person ... infantile tendencies ... the sexual feeling of the child for the parents.... the attraction of the son for the mother, and of the daughter for the father.... with the overcoming and rejection of these ...incestuous phantasies, ... one of the most painful psychic accomplishment of puberty; ... the breaking away from the parental authority, ... opposition between the new and old generation ... important for cultural progress.’” (Freud Three Contributions to the Theory of Sex) The language of phantasy "dream language" is the language of "ought." Maslow in his book The Farther Reaches of Human Nature wrote, "We have to study the conditions which maximize ought-perceptiveness. Oughtiness is itself a fact to be perceived. If we wish to permit the facts to tell us their oughtiness, we must learn to listen to them in a very specific way which can be called Taoistic. Discovering one’s real nature is simultaneously an ought quest and an is quest. An 'Ought-Is-Quest' is a religious quest in the naturalistic sense. Is becomes the same as ought. Fact becomes the same as value. The world which is becomes the world which ought to be." (Maslow) Karl Marx recognized the same nature in mankind: “In short, philosophy as theory finds the ‘ought’ implied within the ‘is’, and as praxis seeks to make the two coincide.” (Joseph O’Malley, summing up Marx in Marx's work Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right' )
Marcuse wrote that: “Phantasy [role-playing "ought"] plays a most decisive function in the total mental structure: it links the deepest layers of the unconscious with the highest products of consciousness, the dream with the reality [the 'ought' with the 'is' negating the 'not,' a circumvention of restraining commands] ... the perpetual but repressed ideas of the collective and individual memory, the tabooed images of freedom.” “Phantasy is cognitive in so far as it preserves the truth of the Great Refusal, ... in so far as it protects, ... the aspirations for the integral fulfillment of man and nature ... the ‘lower depth’ of instinctual gratification assumes a new dignity.” Phantasy “... unit[s] the whole person, the universal and particular under pleasure.” (Marcuse) Perversions, according to Marcuse “show a deep affinity to phantasy” since phantasy is “free from reality-testing” and “subordinated to the pleasure principle alone” and can be aroused through “artistic imagination.” (Imagination-"the act or power of forming a mental image of something not present to the senses or never before wholly perceived in reality" Merriam-Webster Dictionary) Phantasy “links perversions with the images of integral freedom and gratification.” (Marcuse)
“Casting down imaginations and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” 2 Corinthians 10:3-5
The "animalization" of the traditional home.
Redefining man as a "social animal."
"And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him." Genesis 2:18
Therefore, according to Brown, "Human consciousness can be liberated from the parental (Oedipal) complex [sense of guilt] only be being liberated from its cultural derivatives, the paternalistic state and the patriarchal God." The reason for the sense of guilt, so prevalent in western civilization, Brown writes: "... appears to be historically connected with the rise of patriarchal religion (for the Western development the Hebrews are decisive)." (Brown) The sons (pleasure seeking sons) are first driven off by the father. Their praxis, their natural desire to "relate sensuously" (incest) with their mother was seen by the father as perverse. Freud used the phrase "polymorphous-perverse" in describing the child-mother praxis (matriarchal paradigm) in light of the father praxis (patriarchal paradigm). “Children are polymorphously perverse. . . . by the standards of normal adult sexuality” (Brown) since they naturally utilize “all ... the sex instincts [touch, taste, sight, smell, sound] ... which do not serve or prepare for the procreative function.” All such “... perversions thus express rebellion against the subjugation of sexuality under the order of procreation, and against the institutions which guarantee this order.” (Marcuse) Brown put it this way: “The discarded elements of infantile sexuality [all body parts] are, judged by the standards of normal adult sexuality, perverse [erotic activities] . . . if they are pursued as substitutes [not used toward procreation].” Looking at it from the child's position Brown writes “Normal adult sexuality, judged by the standard of infantile sexuality, is an unnatural restriction of the erotic potentialities of the human body.”
This is the neo-Marxist (Freud and Marx) lens, those who now "serve" us in government, use to determine right and wrong behavior. Therefore according to Brown “Parental discipline, religious denunciation of bodily pleasure, . . . have all left man overly docile, but secretly in his unconscious unconvinced, and therefore neurotic.” Therefore, the "laws of the flesh" is man's "Great Refusal." A "neurotic" condition is produced when man's natural inclinations are blocked by "unrealistic" (unnatural) demands, i.e. by God, parent, law. Therefore Brown writes “According to Freud, the ultimate essence of our being is erotic, and demands activity according to the pleasure-principle.” “Fore-pleasure is the preliminary play with all parts of the body, and represent a perpetuation of the pure polymorphous perverse play of infantile sexuality.” The energy or desire with which the human being pursues pleasure is the pleasurable activity of an organ of the body. Infants are absorbed in their own bodies; they are in love with themselves. Infants know no guide except the pleasure-principle. Infants have a richer sexual life than adults. In man, infantile sexuality is repressed and never outgrown; repression, (and consequently neurosis) distinguishes man from the other animals.” (Brown) The quest is "To rediscover the animal in man." Maslow believed the road to health began with the animal trait of nudity. "It looks as if nudism is the first step toward ultimate free-animality-humanism. Must encourage it. Nakedness is absolutely right. So is the attack on antieroticism, the Christian and Jewish foundations." (Lowry The Journals of Abraham Maslow) Carl Rogers wrote: “The innermost core of man’s nature, the base of his ‘animal nature,’ is positive in nature." “Maslow puts up a vigorous case for man's animal nature . . . anti-social emotions – hostility, jealousy, etc. – result from frustration of more basic impulses for love and security and belonging [Eros].” “Do we dare to generalize from this type of experience that if we cut through deeply enough to our organismic nature, that we find that man is a positive and social animal? This is the suggestion from our clinical experience.” (Rogers)
Promises or the lack thereof
"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us–ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless." 2 Peter 3:9-14
The problem lies, according to Brown, in man's ability to "promise." He wrote: “Nietzsche begins by defining man as the ‘animal that can promise.’” “The ability to promise involves the loss of the natural animal forgetfulness of the past, which is the precondition for healthy living in the present.” “Through the ability to promise, the future is bound to the past.” “It is what makes man responsible; it is his conscience.” “Man is the animal which represses himself and which creates culture or society in order to repress himself.” But, according to Brown “Man is distinguished from animals not simply by culture, but also by a desire to change his culture and so to change himself.” It is this ability of man to change himself which gives the socio-psychologists, i.e. the globalists, hope in achieving world "peace." Marcuse, as Brown, promoted the sensuous nature of man as the pathway out of repression. Marcuse writes, concerning the use of two of man's "animalistic" senses (quoting Freud), “The vicissitudes of the ‘proximity senses’ (smell and taste) ... is ‘much more a bodily, physical one, hence also more akin to sexual pleasure' .... give, as it were, unsublimated pleasure per se (and unrepressed disgust). They relate (and separate) individuals immediately. Such immediacy is incompatible with the effectiveness of organized domination, with a society which ‘tends to isolate people, to put distance between them, and to prevent spontaneous relationships and the the natural animal-like expressions of such relations.'”
"Freud takes with absolute seriousness the proposition of Jesus: ‘Except ye become as little children, ye can in no wise enter the kingdom of heaven.’” (Brown)
According to Brown heaven can be found on earth: “In the words of Thoreau: ‘We need pray for no higher heaven than the pure senses can furnish, a purely sensuous life. Our present senses are but rudiments of what they are destined to become.’” The famous socio-psychologist Abraham Maslow wrote: "Heaven is available to us now, and is all around us." (Abraham Maslow Maslow on Management) “The foundation on which the man of the future will be built is already there, in the repressed unconscious; the foundation has to be recovered.” (Brown) Brown writes: since “[s]exual instinct seeks union with objects in the world....” and “[e]ros is fundamentally a desire for union (being one) with objects in the world ... [e]ros is the foundation of morality.” Therefore "... self-perfection (narcissism) of the human individual is fulfilled in union with the world in pleasure.” “Human perfection consists in an expansion of the self until it enjoys the world as it enjoys itself.” Any such praxis of Eros is "tabooed" in a patriarchal society. Yet in a civilization of Eros (built upon sensitivity training) a patriarchal society is seen as enslaving "the pleasure ego by the reality ego" i.e. "enslaving" the children and the mother by the father. Take note: this is the foundation on which "hate" crimes are being defined and will be judged. "Children ... have not acquired that sense of shame which, according to the Biblical story, expelled mankind from Paradise [seen as an act of hate], and which, presumably, would be discarded if Paradise were regained." (Brown) The issue with all these men was how to restore the Garden in Eden (Eden means "pleasure"; "And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil." Genesis 2:9), a lifestyle of (p)leasure and guaranteed sustenance ("the good life," the sensuous life). But this time the world wants a garden of pleasure without God.
Consciousness, instead of being the watchman over a dangerous and unpredictable lot of impulses, becomes the comfortable inhabitant of a society of impulses and feelings and thoughts. The individual increasingly comes to feel that this locus of evaluation lies within himself [as Eve felt in the Garden in Eden]. Individuals move not from a fixity through change to a new fixity, though such a process is indeed possible. But [through a] continuum from fixity to changingness, from rigid structure to flow, from stasis to process [from absolutism-faith to relativism-doubt]. The good life is not any fixed state [found in obedience to God]. The good life is a process [found in Satan's process as used in the Garden in Eden]. The direction which constitutes the good life is psychological freedom to move in any direction [where] the general qualities of this selected direction appear to have a certain universality [Eros]. Doing what ‘feels right’ proves to be a competent and trustworthy guide to behavior which is truly satisfying. As we reach the fork in the road. Thinking starts at that point. If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow. We know how to change the opinions of an individual in a selected direction, without his ever becoming aware of the stimuli which changed his opinion [this is the condition every one of our elected officials face in a facilitated subcommittees striving for consensus]. (Walden Two) [quotation of Skinner]: ‘Now that we know how positive reinforcement works, and why negative doesn’t’ … ‘we can be more deliberate and hence more successful in our cultural design.’ “We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled, though they are following a code much more scrupulously than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That’s the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement—there’s no restraint and no revolt. By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior—the motives, the desires, the wishes. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises. . . .we will inevitably find ourselves moving toward the chosen goal, and probably thinking that we ourselves desired it. …it appears that some form of completely controlled society … is coming. “We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood. The choice is up to use, and the human race being what it is, we are likely to stumble about, making at times some nearly disastrous value choices, and at other times highly constructive ones.” (Rogers)
Marcuse & Freud
Dad and mom may not be perfect but the office is.
The liberal agenda is to negate the patriarchal office in the thinking (theory) of every individual and in actions (practice-praxis) of society.
"Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him." Ephesians 6:1-9
Liberals may not like the concept of being servant to any master. Yet they refuse to recognize themselves as being servants to their master, the flesh and the prince of the power of the air. They, by their nature, seek to be masters over others, making them servants. How many people pay taxes to support this process against their will—as John Dewey's students said "Do we have to do what we want to do?"—and against their conscience, having to perform to the liberals demands for fear of the liberals punishing them with fines and imprisonment. The American citizen is now servant to their master Eros and unfortunately most are loving it.
The Sexual Revolution
"If it feels good, just do it." Herbert Marcuse Eros and Civilization
"And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work. Flee also youthful lusts:" 2 Timothy 2: 19-22a
Fleshly desires are subject to a higher authority, the sons are subject to the father's will, his commands. "Thy will be done on earth, as in heaven." All this is against their own natural inclination of relationship with the one whom they love—the mother, natural resources, the beauty of the cosmos. Following the Gnostic story, man is now subject to God's will (demiurge), he is thus repressed. This subordination to a higher authority, against a person's natural inclination, splits (alienates) man from his "rightful" (sinful) relation with nature, the creation—Sophia, "mother earth," Gaia, the cosmic forces. Marcuse reveals the danger which lies in Freud's line of reasoning: "A society which employs sexuality as means for a useful end, the perversions upheld sexuality as an end in itself; they thus place themselves outside the domain of the performance principle [obedience toward God, parent, commander, law of the land, the very essence of sovereignty] and challenge its very foundation.” This is a mandate to execute patricide and a call to perform incest. Remember that Freud is not calling sex the act of procreation (he called the praxis of procreation castration). “In terms of the pleasure principles ... reproduction is merely a ‘by-product.” (Marcuse) Sex, to Freud, was the orgiastic, Dionysian, sensuousness of touch, taste, sight, smell, sound, seeking expression (Orpheus) and unity (Narcissus) with that with which the senses are "naturally" drawn through (Eros). The pathway of "world peace," including the "church," is via Eros. “Dionysus affirms the dialectical unity of the great instinctual opposites: reunifies male and female, Self and Others, life and death.” (Brown) Thus adultery, homosexuality, lesbianism, pedophilia, etc. can be justified as forms of expressing love (tolerated), and thus can become the core of social unity. Any opposition would be labeled as hate, as the movement is today.
"In his [Wilhelm Reich] opinion, the repression of sexuality has social and economic origins, not biological ones. Sexual repressiveness appeared with the beginnings of class society and the institution of private property and patriarchy. It was installed by a particular social group, that of polygamous chiefs, in whose hands, thanks to the accumulation of dowries paid by their wives, economic power now resided. In modern times, such repression remains indispensable in order to safeguard the two essential institutions of society : monogamous marriage and the family. It constitutes one of the means of economic enslavement. The sexual revolution is only possible through social revolution." ‘Hommage à Wilhelm Reich’, pp.15-16. by Daniel Guerin Reich in his book Dialectical Materialism and Psychoanalysis (1929), presented the critique of religion and morality, the destruction of individual autonomy, the importance the sexual instincts in family life, a critical theory of the family, a socialization of Freud and humanization of Marx.
Alfred Charles Kinsey, a Rockefeller and federally-funded pedophile, noted for his "Kinsey Report," coined the phrase "sexual revolution." His defense of homosexuality assisted the American Psychiatric Association in removing homosexually from their list of mental illnesses. Wilhelm Reich, a Marxist who, along with Kurt Lewin, edited the Frankfurt Schools journal, the Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung, advocated a guilt-free sex life, promoted Freud's perverse agenda upon the American citizen—into their lives in the community and into their homes. Those who have become captors of abomination, are blind to any other way which might limit their way. Like spoiled, hateful children, demanding their way, they praxis contempt for any other way but their way, outwardly touting "tolerance" for all, while inwardly planning the annihilation of any who might interfere with their perverse way.
Both the feminist (matriarchal paradigm) and the homosexual (heresiarchal paradigm) praxis is an attack upon the patriarchal paradigm and a direct rejection of obedience to God if not an outright rejection of him. "I insist on maintaining that the homosexual cannot and must not be seen as a separate problem, and that the liberation of the homosexual must not be seen as the egoistic demand of a minority. Homosexuality is just a particular form, a variation, of sexuality and must be considered in the broadest context. [...] The prejudice with which this mode of behaviour is besmirched derives, in large part, from patriarchal society’s depreciation of femininity, considered as 'inferior'. Seen in this way, the cause of the homosexual is the cause of woman." (Daniel Guérin ‘La répression de l’homosexualité en France’, p.1.)
In light of this definition of sex and according to those using sensitivity training to bring peace and harmony upon the earth, what Satan got Eve to praxis in the Garden in Eden ("polymorphic-perverse" behavior) is the desired outcome for every person on the face of the earth. As stated before, it is not how far down the path you have traveled that matters, you may have just started down this dialectical pathway and all, for the moment, "seems to be" well, it is all about the path that you are on. The praxis of the dialectical paradigm is Satan's pathway, the pathway which will lead you to eternal fire.
"But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." Matthew 5:7
"Vanity of vanities, saith the preacher; all is vanity." "Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment. Therefore remove sorrow from thy heart, and put away evil from thy flesh: for childhood and youth are vanity." "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil." Ecclesiastes 1:2; 11:9, 10; 12:13, 14
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 13:6
If your not interested in knowing and obeying the Father's will, first and foremost, then you must find another Jesus, a diaprax Jesus, an Eros Jesus, a consensus Jesus. You must seek after the Jesus of the apostate, contemporary, post-modern, synergistic, mega-church—the peoples church.
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers." John 10: 1-5
"What can I get out of this relationship for myself?" is not the praxis of the sheep who follow the voice of their shepherd, who laid down his life for his sheep. There is no "blessed subtraction" in his mouth. "I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep." John 10: 14, 15
"From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God. Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy? But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up." James 4:1-10
"If I could only ...." as in "If I could only touch the tree." is the wrong pathway when it comes to God's word.
The Apostle Paul was under house arrest for two years. Money would have set him free. Acts 24:22-27 Where was the church when he need it? The mega-church would have come to his aid, on second thought, maybe NOT.
Does anyone notice these trends in the "church" today?
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." Matthew 7:13, 14
If those who conspire to overthrow established order (treason) are treated as one who commits an act of violence, why are not facilitators, those who propagate this agenda on American, not treated as such? Because, we like Eve in the Garden in Eden, enjoy the pathway of pleasure, of Eros, the praxis of the dialectical paradigm. "By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior―the motives, the desires, the wishes. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises." "If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow." (Carl Rogers On Becoming A Person)
Church growth, Emerging church, and all who follow their praxis of a dialectical paradigm are using Satan's paradigm—the same paradigm he used on Eve in the Garden in Eden. The good son Jesus is being promoted by these "ministers," using the "bad son's" (Satan's) dialectical method. Bogomilos Bogomil preached of the two sons of God, the bad son, Satan, and the good son, Jesus. Their synthesis is buggery i.e. sodomy. Moslems down through the ages have praxised buggery on Christians they captured. Is it no wonder the modern church is so involved in homosexual interests, focusing on AID's, while seeking harmony with the Moslem religion. Not calling both praxis by God's descriptive, abomination and apostasy. The sign along the "modern" church's pathway reads: This is the pathway of the tolerance of ambiguity—buggery. As has been stated before, it is not how far down the road you have traveled, it is all about the road that you are on.
Welcome to the diaprax pathway of "oughtiness," the pathway of the flesh, the pathway of human reasoning, the pathway of pleasure and love, the pathway of the "group hug," the pathway of TQM, TQL, STW, COPS, "Church Growth," "Emerging Church," etc., the pathway of consensus, synergy, life long learning, general systems theory, the pathway to "permanent peace." Just realize this, this pathway to "world peace and social harmony" is the same pathway to death and Hell. Hell is PERMANENT. A place where "ought" changes to "should," where for eternity men will cry out in pain "I should have listened to those preaching the truth, I should have repented, I should have ...."
God is not a God of Hate but a God of Love. But because man has decided his human love is true love, because he has rejected the Love of God, because he has justified in his eyes to treat God's Love as Hate—God chastens those he Loves, expecting us to deny our selves and humble our selves—he has chosen a temporal "seems to be" love and rejected an eternal true Love, which only God can provide. This is the Love of our Heavenly Father, revealed to us through the Love of his Son, Jesus Christ, given to us to know through his Holy Spirit.
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." John 3:16-19
To chasten, to spank for doing wrong.
Patricide: either there is no father in the family or he does not act like one.
"‘It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one’s father or abstained from the deed,’ if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same .” Herbert Marcuse Eros and Civilization, quoting Sigmund Freud
It does not really matter whether the family no longer has a father (God) or he is present as long as the "family" is not restrained by the act of chastening (negative "force field"). In other words, the fear of judgment from either a heavenly father or an earthly father is no longer justifiable in the life (praxis) and the thoughts (theory) of the "earthly family."
“Once the earthly family [which chastens] is discovered to be the secret of the heavenly family [which chastens] the former must itself be annihilated, both in theory and in practice [chastening no longer accepted as proper behavior in the thoughts, the theory, of each individual and in the life, the praxis, of the community "family"].” Karl Marx Feuerbach Thesis #4
"When a man has finally reached the point where he does not think he knows it better than others, that is when he has become indifferent to what they have done badly and he is interested only in what they have done right, then peace and affirmation have come to him."
G. F. W. Hegel, in one of the casual notes preserved at Widener.
Psychology is all about the negation of the patriarch (negative) and the promotion of incest (positive). This is Abomination in the eyes of the Lord.
To see a child spanked is not a pleasant thing in the eyes of the world, for "boys will be boys." Satan knew that the world would back this one.
Regarding spanking, a friend of mine shared about a woman with a key chain which read : "I'm not mean, your a sissy."
"For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons." Hebrews 12:6-8
Some of my sources:
All scriptures from the King James Authorized Bible (which labels me as an "uneducated" traditionalist by some, if you're into profiling.)
(Adorno) Theodor Adorno
The Authoritarian Personality
(Bronner) Stephen Eric Bronner Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists
(Brown) Norman O. Brown Life Against Death
James Coleman The Adolescent Society
Erich Fromm Escape from Freedom
(Marcuse) Herbert Marcuse Eros and Civilization, 1955
top of page
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2007