authorityresearch.com

"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." Proverb. 3: 5-6

The Institution for Authority Research

Issues of today:
(personal note)
(Bracketed information in quotations and verses is information added by me.)
Seven links that are essential to understanding the dialectic process: 1) The father's/Father's authority, 2) The guilty conscience, 3) The child's carnal nature, 4) dopamine emancipation, 5) The difference between Discussion and Dialogue, 6) Diaprax Chart, and 7) Paradigm Chart.

Discussion vs. Dialogue

    The difference between the "old" world order and the "new" is the difference between discussion and dialogue, i.e., the difference between reasoning from established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., holding your "self" accountable and/or being held accountable for your thoughts and actions (in the light of established commands, rules, facts, and truth)—which is indicative of the father's/Father's "top-down," "right-wrong," "above-below" authority system, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will—and 'reasoning' from your "feelings," i.e., from your carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' which are being stimulated by the world, i.e., by the situation of the 'moment,' which is being manipulated by a facilitator of 'change,' i.e., 'reasoning' in and from the 'light" of the current situation and your carnal desires of the 'moment' ("enlightenment"), questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking any established command, rule, fact, or truth that "gets in the way" of your carnal desires of the 'moment,' 'justifying' your "self," i.e., 'justifying' your "feelings" (your carnal desires, i.e., your "self interests") of the 'moment'—establishing your "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., your "self" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, i.e., 'liberating' you from having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline your "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will, esteeming your "self" instead.
    By not seeing or holding their "self" accountability to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., to the father's/Father's authority, children (of disobedience), 'liberals,' socialists, psychologists, "behavioral scientists," group psychotherapists, facilitators of 'change', Transformational Marxists (all being the same in method or formulaseducing, deceiving, and manipulating , i.e., "beguiling" all who came before them) are 'justified' (in their mind) in questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking any command, rule, fact, or truth that gets in their way, 'justifying' their hatred toward and attacking of the father's/Father's authority—behavior which is indicative of the child's carnal nature, i.e., the heart of man. By making the child's carnal nature, i.e., the approaching of pleasure and the avoiding of pain (which includes the pain of missing out on pleasure) the 'drive' (thesis) of life, the 'purpose' of life becomes that of 'liberating' the child's carnal nature from established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., from the father's/Father's authority (from that which gets in the way of pleasure—making the father's/Father's authority the antithesis), i.e., augmenting pleasure and attenuating pain (which includes the removal of anyone who gets in the way of pleasure), i.e., 'liberating' "self" from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., from restraint'—making the synthesis of "self" and the world (in and through pleasure) the objective, i.e., the desired/intended outcome, i.e., the 'purpose' of life.
   In a discussion we evaluate life and make decisions from established commands, rules, facts, and truth (faith)—in order (as in "old" world order) to be and/or do right and not wrong (according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth), i.e., in order to do the father's/Father's will (engendering a guilty conscience in us when we do wrong, disobey, sin)—being held accountable and/or holding our "self" accountable when we do wrong, disobey, sin. In dialogue we evaluate life and make decisions from our "feelings," i.e., from our carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., from our "self interests" of the 'moment,' i.e., from the child's carnal nature in us which is being stimulated by the world, i.e., by the current situation (environment) and anyone manipulating it (sight)—in order (as in "new" world order) to get what we want, when we want it (even if we have to do, are doing, or have done wrong, disobeyed, or sinned against established commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to get or do what we want, doing so without having a guilty conscience—since in dialogue there is no guilty conscience since it is only an opinion, which is subject to 'change'). In dialogue, not seeing our thoughts and actions as being "wrong" (punishable), we do not hold our "self" accountable for anything we have done, are doing, or will be doing "wrong"—since, in dialogue, there is no "wrong," i.e., no established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., no father's/Father's authority, i.e., no guilty conscience, i.e., no accountability for our thoughts and actions in dialogue (What is missing in dialogue?), only our so called "super-ego," i.e., the child's carnal nature in us, i.e., our "self interests" of the 'moment,' i.e., the world of our own desires, 'created' in our image (subject to our carnal desires of the 'moment'), which we, through dialogue with others, seek to 'justify.'.
    Discussion fills our "empty space," i.e., our thoughts of the 'moment' with established commands, rules, facts, and truth, inhibiting or blocking change (dialogue). Dialogue fills our "empty space," i.e., our thoughts of the 'moment' with our carnal desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., our "feelings" of the 'moment,' initiating and sustaining 'change' (dialogue). The agenda of those pushing dialogue ('change') over and therefore against discussion (established commands, rules, facts, and truth) is to "prevent someone who KNOWS from filling the empty space," thereby guaranteeing the 'liberation' the child's carnal nature from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the 'liberation' of "self" from restraint, i.e., the 'liberation' of man from God. (Wilfred Bion, A Memoir of the Future)
    Bringing dialogue into a discussion, i.e., bringing "feelings," i.e., desires, i.e., "self interests" into an environment dealing with established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., making dialogue, i.e., our "self interests" the medium through which we make decisions negates discussion, i.e., negates the "old" world order, i.e., negates objective truth (absolutes, i.e., accountability, i.e., the father's/Father's authority), engendering a so called "new" world order where commands, rules, facts, and truth are subject to our "feelings" (our desires, i.e., our"self interests") of the 'moment,' i.e., subject to the child's carnal nature in us, making 'truth' subjective (adaptable to 'change'). In our mind, since we are no longer accountable for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning against established commands, rules, facts, and truth, we are 'justified' in questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking the father's/Father's authority (and visa versa). There-in, being 'justified' in our carnal nature, i.e., being 'justified' in our love of pleasure and hate of restraint only (alone) we become "actualized," i.e., "self actualized." .
    Discussion holds us accountable to an authority above our "feelings," i.e., above our carnal desires of the 'moment' requiring us to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline our "self" in order to hear the truth. Dialogue on the other hand holds us accountable to our "self," requiring us to suspend, as upon a cross any command, rule, fact, or truth that hurts (gets in the way of) our "feelings," i.e., our carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., that prevents dialogue ('change').
    If you place a child in a dialogue ("feelings," i.e., affective domain, i.e., "self interest") based classroom (environment)—deciding right and wrong behavior through "feelings"—you can grade him (tell where he is along a spectrum (continuum) of 'change'—from resisting 'change,' to being adaptable to 'change,' to promoting 'change'), i.e., you can tell whether he is 1) traditional minded, i.e., reasoning from established commands, rules, facts, and truth—where (having learned to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline his "self," in order to do/be right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth) he attempts to get ("force") others to do the same (holding their "self" accountable to established commands, rules, facts, and truth as well), preaching commands and rules to them to be obeyed as given, teaching facts and truth to them to be accepted as is, by faith, and discussing with them any questions they might have, thereby engendering a guilty conscience (accountability) in them for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, resulting in them resisting, inhibiting, blocking dialogue, i.e., preventing 'change' (preventing him and them from becoming a part of "the group" which is compromising, i.e., questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in order to do what they want, when they want)—2) transitional minded, i.e., 'reasoning' from his "feelings," i.e., from his desires, i.e., from his "self interests" of the 'moment' (dialoguing with his "self") and yet also trying to reason from established commands, rules, facts, and truth (discussing with his "self") how to respond to the current situation (the classroom environment) which, with discussion and dialogue conflicting with one another (being antithetical), forces him to remain silent in order for him not to be rejected by "the group"—while desiring/willing to go with "the group," which is doing wrong, disobeying, sinning against established commands, rules, facts, and truth he still has (retains) a guilty conscience ("feels" bad or wrong) for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning against established commands, rules, facts, and truth, just not telling anybody if possible—or 3) transformational minded, i.e., 'reasoning' from/through dialogue, i.e., from/through his "feelings," i.e., from/through his carnal desires, i.e., from/through his "self interests" of the 'moment' (along with the "feelings," i.e., the desires, i.e., the "self interests" of others), 'justifying' his "self," i.e., his carnal desires of the 'moment' before others he ends up being affirmed ("self actualized") by them, thereby affirming ("self actualizing") them (their "feelings," i.e., their carnal desires, i.e., their "self interests" of the 'moment) in the process. 'Reasoning' from/through his "feelings," i.e., his desires, i.e., his "self interests" of the 'moment he no longer has a guilty conscience, i.e., he no longer sees his "self" as being accountably, i.e., as being bad or wrong when he does wrong, disobeys, sins against established commands, rules, facts, and truth. Therefore, he is 'justified,' i.e., 'liberated' (in his mind) to question, challenge, disregard, defy (deride), attack those who try to hold him accountable, i.e., who try to make him feel guilty ("feel" bad or wrong) for his thoughts and actions. Through dialogue, having 'created' a world made in his own image—according to his carnal desires—he is 'justified' (in his mind) in silencing (censoring) or removing (negating) anyone who gets in his way, i.e., who does not fit in his 'creation,' i.e., in his desired outcome—including the unborn, the elderly, and the righteous (those who insist upon doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., who insist upon doing the Father's will), i.e., who "get in the way" of pleasure, i.e., his carnal desires of the 'moment,', i.e., his "self interest," i.e., his 'creation,' i.e., his dialogue with his "self."

"There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain) The "educator" does not have to tell his or her students to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parent's authority when they get home from school (if they are not doing that already). After participating in their "Bloom's Taxonomy," i.e., affective domain, i.e., dialoguing opinions to a consensus classroom, they will do that automatically when they get home from school. All "educators" are certified and schools accredited today based upon their use of "Bloom's Taxonomies," i.e., their use of dialogue in the classroom to 'change' how students think and act toward their "self," toward others, toward the world, and toward authority.

    When it comes to doing right and not wrong, the more the child replaces discussion with dialogue, i.e., makes commands, rules, facts, and truth subject to his "feelings," i.e., to his carnal desires, i.e., to his "self interests" of the 'moment' the more transformational minded ("of and for self," i.e., of and for the "new" world order) he becomes. It is just that simple.
    The same 'change' (paradigm "shift") is taking place in how "adults" think and act today, not only in the community, in the workplace, in the media, in entertainment, in government, but in the home and "church" as well. For example: when a "representative" replaces discussion with dialogue in a policy making environment, i.e., when making law, he no longer re-presents his constituents—his "self interest" having taken their place. He not only does not see his "self" as being wrong in his decision, he does not see his "self" as being accountable (punishable) for any harm he, i.e., his decision has or will bring (inflict) upon his constituents (only admitting he might have done things "badly," which is not a crime, promising to do things "better" the next time). When making law through the consensus process, only his "feelings," i.e., his carnal desires, i.e., his "self interests" are being "represented"—making whoever is in control of, i.e., facilitating the meeting (manipulating the meeting, i.e., manipulating those in the meeting) in control of "the people." In like fashion, when "church" leadership replaces the preaching, teaching, and discussing of God's Word with dialogue, making the Word of God subject to men's opinions, i.e., to the leaderships "feelings," i.e., their carnal desires, i.e., their "self interests" of the 'moment,' the "church" becomes apostate—buys into the lie that it no longer is subject to the Father's authority, i.e., that it no longer is accountable to the Father for its thoughts and actions.
    There is a place for dialogue in your life—when it comes to preferences, i.e., what you want to eat at lunch, what you want to wear to school, work, etc., what color you want to paint the room, etc.,. But when it is comes to being/doing right and not wrong, dialogue makes you (your decisions) subject to your carnal nature only, i.e. makes you subject to the world which stimulates it, i.e., makes you subject to whoever is manipulating (facilitating) the current environment (situation/meeting), i.e., seducing, deceiving, and manipulating you, making you an enemy of God.

    "It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23
    "[E]very one of us shall give account of himself to God." Romans 14:12

About, Issues, Articles (archived), Links, Booklet, Schedule, Material, Scheduling, Audios, Radio, Sources, Textus Receptus, Class, Warnings, Thanks!, Donation, P.S., Censorship of this website by McAfee. Through its use of algorithms Google is censoring this website. Contact: deangotcher@gmail.com or deangotcher@authorityresearch.com

The father's/Father's authority is a political system. The child's carnal nature is a political system. The "old" world order is based upon the father's/Father's authority, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth (requiring faith in the one in authority), with people (including those in authority) having a guilty conscience for doing wrong disobeying, sinning. Having a guilty conscience may not stop them from doing wrong, disobeying, sinning but they have a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning anyway. The "new" world order is based upon the child's carnal nature, i.e., "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates, 'justifying' the child's carnal nature over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, i.e., 'liberating' children from having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline their "self" in order to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, so people (especially those in power) can do wrong, disobey, sin (do unconscionable things) with impunity (without having a guilty conscience). In the "new" world order anyone who has a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for being "normal" is classified as being "neurotic," i.e., "mentally ill," i.e., "negative," divisive, hateful, intolerant, maladjusted, not a "team builder," "psychological," "in denial," a sociopath, prejudiced, a "lower-order-thinker," a Fascist, a Nazi, a racist, phobic, unreasonable, irrational, etc., and therefore they and "their" commands, rules, facts, and truth are to be questioned, challenged, defied, disregarded, or attacked, i.e., considered as being irrational, therefore irrelevant since they do not fit into the "new" world order, i.e., 'justify' the child's carnal nature ("the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life"), i.e., treat the child's carnal nature as being the "norm."

"The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such [once he is 'liberated' from the father'/Father's authority to become as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life (separating him from his "self" and the world), "of and for self" and the world only]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)

That is why those of the "new" world order insist upon communicating through dialogue ("feelings," i.e., the child's carnal nature) instead of discussion (established commands, rules, facts, and truth—unless it is their "established" commands, rules, facts, and truth based upon their "feelings," i.e., opinion, i.e., "felt needs," i.e., carnal desires, i.e., "self interests" of the 'moment'), since dialogue 'justifies' the child's carnal nature, i.e., "all that is in [and "of"] the world" only (sight, i.e., "the imagination of the heart")—there is no father's/Father's authority, i.e., established commands, rules, facts, or truth in dialogue)—discussion supports the father's/Father's authority , i.e., established commands, rules, facts, and truth (faith—"It is impossible to please God without faith." "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.").

    "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." 1 John 2:16
    "And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men [through dialogue, 'justifying' your carnal desires, i.e., your "self interest" of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, with the affirmation of others, achieving consensus (a "feeling" of "oneness") with them]; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15
    "The heart is deceitful above all things [thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's will, i.e., having to set aside pleasure, i.e., having to humble, deny, die to "self" in order (as in "old" world order) to do the father's/Father's will, i.e., in order to do right and not wrong according the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth], and desperately wicked [hating the father's/Father's authority which "gets in the way," i.e. which prevents, i.e., inhibits or blocks it from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment'—which the world stimulates]: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 You, dialoguing with your "self," i.e., 'justifying' your "self," i.e., 'justifying' your love of pleasure, "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world is stimulating, can not see your hatred toward the father/Father as being evil because your love of "self," i.e., your love of ("lust" for) pleasure—which the world stimulates—is "in the way," blinding you to the truth of the deceitfulness and wickedness of your heart.

Which political system controls your life depends upon how you respond to the child's carnal nature in you, i.e., your "self," with you either humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining your "self" in order to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, doing the father's/Father's will or esteeming your "self," i.e., 'justifying' your "self," i.e., 'justifying' the child's carnal nature in you, doing what you want, when you want with affirmation from others, who, 'like' you, loving ("lusting" after) the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates naturally hate the father's/Father's authority, i.e., hate restraint and the restrainer—negating it/him (and anyone who gets in the way of their carnal desires, i.e., their "lusts," i.e., their "self interest" of the 'moment'—including the unborn and the elderly), doing so without having a guilty conscience.

"Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." "Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is." Jeremiah 17:5, 7

This website is all about explaining why? and how? the father's/Father's authority is being left out, attacked, and removed (through the use of dialogue—there is no father's/Father's authority, and therefore no guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in dialogue) in education, in the workplace, in government, and even in the "church." The father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience which it engenders restrains/blocks the child's carnal nature, i.e., "human nature." The father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience is the "lid" to "Pandora's box"—a "box" full of evils, which, once opened (once the "lid" is removed), can not be closed. The so called "New" World Order is all about children of disobedience, i.e., psychologists, i.e., "behavioral scientists," i.e., group psychotherapists, i.e., facilitators of 'change', i.e., Transformational Marxists (all being the same in method or formulaseducing, deceiving, and manipulating , i.e., "beguiling" all who came before them, turning them into chickens, rats, and dogs , i.e., "human resource" in the group grade," "safe zone/space/place," "Don't be negative, be positive," soviet style, brainwashing, "Bloom's Taxonomy," affective domain, dialoguing opinions ("feelings") to a consensus , i.e., affirmation, "building relationship upon self interest" classroom), negating the "lid," i.e., 'liberating' the child(ren) from the father's/Father's authority (from accountability), negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning (fear of judgment) in the process, i.e., letting the child(ren) rule the world instead, with themselves, i.e., 'liberals,' i.e., socialists in control (in power). Replacing the preaching, teaching, and discussing of established commands, rules, facts, and truth, which are to be accepted by faith and obeyed, with the dialoguing of opinions ("feelings") to a consensus (affirmation) does the trick. You can see it being put into praxis everywhere you turn these days.

Google has labeled this website as "extreme," which it is not (facts and truth are not "extreme"—"unless they get in the way of someone's agenda"), resulting in many businesses and schools censoring it, preventing access to it. Google is doing nothing different than Hitler, preventing anyone who they disagree with (who is exposing what they are doing) from sharing the truth. Any response to Google for their actions would be appreciated.

Diaprax:
the dialoguing of opinions ("feelings") to a consensus process (praxis).
Facebook mentality.

by
Dean Gotcher


Introduction of Part 1
(Part 2, Part 3)

The dialectic process, i.e., 'reasoning' from the child's/man's carnal nature, i.e., 'reasoning' from "feelings," i.e., from "sense experience," i.e., from "the lust of the flesh," "lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," i.e., from "self interest," i.e., 'reasoning' through dialogue is antithetical to the father's/Father's authority., i.e., reasoning from established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., reasoning through discussion. The traditional family, local control, 'limited' government, unalienable rights, individualism/Nationalism, under God, sovereignty, private convictions, property, business, the "fellowshipping of the saints," faith in God is negated through the praxis of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., dialogue—making right and wrong subject to "feelings," i.e., to the child's/man's carnal nature, i.e., to the child's/man's "lust" for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates. 'Justifying' his "self" through dialogue, the child's/man's hatred toward restraint (and the restrainer), i.e., his hatred toward the father's/Father's authority is 'justified' in his eyes. Instead of right and wrong being subject to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will, it is now subject to whoever is seducing, deceiving, and manipulating, i.e., 'justifying' the child's/man's carnal nature, i.e., "human nature" turning him into "human resource," so he can be bought and sold (used) for their own pleasure and gain. Your "lusts" are made manifest and 'justified' in dialogue. "Self interest," i.e., covetousness, i.e., dialogue makes you seducible, deceivable, manipulatable, i.e., subject to whoever gets you into dialogue, turning you against the father/Father and his/His authority, negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process. Look around you. It is the way the world is going today. Even the "church" is now dialoguing everyone's opinion of the Word of God instead of preaching, teaching, and discussing it, accepting it as "written," by faith and obeying it, doing the Father's will. To dialogue, you must suspend the truth, as upon a cross, in order to allow everyone to share their opinion. It is then that you must decide whether truth is more important than "human(ist) relationship," i.e., the approval (affirmation) of men, making fellowship dependent upon truth, i.e., the Word of God or "human(ist) relationship," i.e., your desire for the approval of men (affirmation—which is not only intoxication, but additive and possessive as well) is more important than truth, making "truth" subject to "human(ist) relationship," i.e., everyone's opinion. It all hinges upon the importance (or unimportance) of the Father's authority in your life. The Son, Jesus Christ came to 'redeem' us from the Father's wrath upon us for our sins—in order for the Father to 'reconcile' us to Himself. The "son" without the Father, i.e., the "son" who comes with dialogue, i.e., with your "self interest," i.e., with what you covet in mind is the Anti-Christ ("big brother"), 'redeeming' you from the Father and His authority, so you can be your "self," 'reconciling' you, i.e., making you at-one-with your "self," the world, and himself. Which Son/"son" do you choose? You have to choose one. Not to choose is to choose.

"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you:" 2 Peter 2:3
"And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever." 1 John 2:16
"Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?" Romans 6:16
"No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Luke 16:13
"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
"For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." Galatians 1:10
"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." John 5:19
"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
"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9
"and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 1:3
"It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Matthew 4:4
"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

The dialectic (dialoguing of opinions to a consensus) process is the praxis of socialists, i.e., 'liberals', as children of disobedience, "reasoning" from their "feelings" of the 'moment,' which are being stimulated by the world, i.e., the current situation, which they are 'manipulating,' 'justifying' their "self," i.e., their "self interest," i.e., their desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' i.e., dopamine emancipation, which the world stimulates, including affirmation, i.e., the "feeling" which comes with others approving them and their carnal desires, and their dissatisfaction with, resentment toward, hatred against authority, which gets in their way, i.e., which makes them "feel bad," negating (in their thoughts and actions) the father's/Father's authority, i.e., reasoning from established commands, rules, facts, and truth, so they can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity, i.e., so they can do wrong, disobey, sin without being held accountable for their actions (at least in their mind), i.e., so they can do wrong, disobey, sin without having a sense of guilt, i.e., so they can do wrong, disobey, sin without having a guilty conscience. This process directly affects you, your family (your spouse and your children), your friends, your neighbors, your educators, your fellow workers and workplace, your media, your entertainment, your police, your military, your leaders, legislators, and judges, your minister, and the "church," etc., i..e, you and the world you live in—destroying respect for the father's/Father's authority wherever it goes. Its seedbed is found in psychology, i.e., in the "group grade," "group psychotherapy," facilitated,' Transformational Marxist, "safe zone/space/place," "positive," dialoguing opinions to a consensus, soviet style, brainwashing ("Bloom's Taxonomy") classroom (from pre-school to and beyond the University and Vo Tech—public, private, and Christian, including the home school), 'liberating' children and adults (in their thoughts and actions) from their parent's, i.e., the father's/Father's authority (something Georg Hegel, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud all had in mind).
Preaching commands and rules to be obeyed, teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is by faith, and discussing any questions or misunderstandings the children might have (at my discretion) in my classroom, rewarding or blessing the children who do right and obey, correcting or chastening the children who do wrong or disobey sustains the father's/Father's authority in the home. Dialoging opinions to a consensus in my classroom negates the father's/Father's authority in the thoughts and actions of the children. I do not, as an "educator," have to tell the students to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parent's authority when they get home, they will do it automatically after participating in my dialoguing opinions to a consensus, i.e.., "group grade" classroom. "The child takes on the characteristic behavior of the group in which he is placed. . . . he reflects the behavior patterns which are set by the adult leader of the group." (Kurt Lewin in Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education)

Continued ....

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 1997-2020