"... once you can identify a community, you have discovered the primary unity of society above the individual and the family that can be mobilized ... to bring about positive social change." (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz, Community Policing The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing)
"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." James 4:4
"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
"Community" is different than fellowship. "Community" is based upon "feelings," i.e., the child's carnal nature. Fellowship is based upon established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., the father's/Father's authority.
"and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 1:3
The father's authority is challenged in "community," where he has to decide either to hold onto commands, rules, facts, and truth that he has accepted and/or established for his family (dividing him and them from others in the "community") or to compromise them, i.e., set them aside for the sake of initiating or sustaining "relationship" with others in the "community" (who do not abide by or accept them). In compromise, his "self interest," i.e., his desire for affirmation from others, affirming his questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking his own standards supersedes his 'loyalty' to his own office of authority, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth. It is in compromise, i.e., suspending, as upon a cross, established commands, rules, facts, and truth that "offends" others, i.e., that hurts other peoples "feelings," i.e., that makes others "feel guilty," that "community," i.e., "positive social change" is initiated and sustained. It is not that the father is against relationships, i.e., "feelings" or sensuousness altogether. It is that "doing right and not wrong" according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., doing the Father's will, i.e., righteousness, must come first or else he is of and for the world only, 'justifying' his "self," i.e., 'justifying' his "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates (Genesis 3:1-6). Peace, according to the father/Father, comes not from getting what you want, when you want (as the world sees peace), but from having done (or doing) right and not wrong, despite the cost.
Starting with "doing right and not wrong" according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, the father's/Father's authority (Hebrews 12:5-11), i.e., righteousness comes first, engendering a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning (Romans 7:14-25), without which there can be no contrition, repentance, forgiveness, salvation, reconciliation. Starting with "feelings," the child's carnal nature, i.e., sensuousness ("all that is of the world") comes first, allowing the person to do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity, i.e., to 'justify' his "self." Being silent in the midst of unrighteousness, i.e., "tolerating ambiguity" in order to "build relationship," i.e. in order to build "community" is to make unrighteousness, i.e., the child's carnal nature the "norm," negating the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process.
"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." "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." "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 5:19, 30; 12:47-50
"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
Socialism is engendered through "community" (common-unity based upon "feelings"), where the child's carnal nature, i.e., the child's "lust" for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation), which the world stimulates supersedes the father's/Father's authority (which restrains him, alienating him from his "self" and the "community"). Common-unity is based upon compromise, i.e., setting aside established commands, rules, facts, and truth that divides us from one another, finding our identity in what we have in common, i.e., our "feelings," i.e., our sense experience instead. It is only through dialogue that common identity (common-ism) can be 'discovered.' It is only through consensus that common identity (common-ism) can be put into social action (praxis). "Community" is based upon our common experience of loving pleasure and hating restraint, i.e., the carnal nature of the child, where 'reasoning' is taken captive to our carnal desires of the 'moment.'
"Experience is, for me, the highest authority." "Neither the Bible nor the prophets, neither the revelations of God can take precedence over my own direct experience." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
"The ideas of the Enlightenment taught man that he could trust his own reason [his own feelings, i.e., sensuous needs and sense perception, i.e., sense experience, i.e., "self" 'justification'] as a guide to establishing valid ethical norms and that he could rely on himself, needing neither revelation [the Word of God, i.e., the Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth] nor that authority of the church [the Son of God, Jesus Christ] in order to know good and evil." (Stephen Eric Bronner Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists)
This is antithetical to God, the Father's will.
"Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness." Luke 11:35
"And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works." 2 Corinthians 11:14, 15
"There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25
"It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23
"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. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil." Proverbs 3:5-7
"Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." Jeremiah 17:5
The conflict between discussion (doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth) and dialogue ('reasoning' through "feelings," i.e., 'justifying' one's carnal desires of the 'moment') is made manifest in the traditional family, between the father and his children, when he gives his children commands, rules, facts, and truth that get in the way of their carnal desires of the 'moment.' Without the father suspending, as upon a cross, his commands, rules, facts, or truth (that gets in the way of the child's carnal desire of the moment') and responding to the child's "Why?" (why he can't go out), by participating in dialogue with the child instead, relationship is either strained or broken off between the child and the father, i.e., with the child dialoguing with his "self," 'justifying' his dissatisfaction with, resentment toward, or hatred of the father/Father and his/His authority for inhibiting or blocking him from doing or getting what he wants, or the child ends up embracing the father's/Father's way of thinking and acting, i.e., humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will—preventing him from becoming his "self," according to his carnal nature. It is the father's/Father's "Because I said so."/"It is written." or insistence upon discussion, i.e., refusing to go into dialogue regarding right and wrong (which would make right and wrong subjective, i.e., subject to everyone's "feelings" of the 'moment,' thereby initiating and sustaining 'change'—instead of subject to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., objective, inhibiting or blocking 'change') that he retains his office of authority.
"A Dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals." "A key difference between a dialogue and an ordinary discussion is that, within the latter [in a discussion] people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favour of their views as they try to convince others to change. At best this may produce agreement or compromise, but it does not give rise to anything creative." "The purpose of dialogue is to reveal the incoherence in our thought ... [engendering] genuine and creative collective consciousness." "What is essential here [in the consensus process] is the presence of the spirit of dialogue, which is in short, the ability to hold many points of view in suspension, along with a primary interest in the creation of common meaning." (Bohm and Peat, Science, Order, and Creativity)
"The individual may have 'secret' thoughts which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it. To gain access [through getting him or her to dialogue, i.e., to share his or her "feelings," i.e., carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' with others] is particularly important, for here may lie the individual's potential [for 'change,' i.e., to become of and for his "self" and the world only—'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority; our carnal desires of the 'moment' are found in dialogue, doing right and not wrong is found in discussion, i.e., what I want to eat is dialogue, if it is good for me is discussion]." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory) (link added) Dialogue is the seedbed of community (common-ism). Remove dialogue and community (common-ism) is inhibited or blocked.
"Without exception, patients [children/students] enter group therapy [the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus] with the history of a highly unsatisfactory experience in their first and most important group—their primary family [the traditional home]." "What better way to help the patient [the child/the student] recapture the past than to allow him to re-experience and reenact ancient feelings [resentment, hostility] toward parents in his current relationship to the therapist [to the facilitator]? The therapist [the facilitator] is the living personification of all parental images [takes the place of the parent]. Group therapists [facilitators] refuse to fill the traditional authority role: they do not lead in the ordinary manner, they do not provide answers and solutions [teach right from wrong], they urge the group [the children/the students] to explore and to employ its own resources [dialogue, i.e., share their "feelings," i.e., their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' in the "light" of the situation, fear of group rejection]. The group [the children/the students must] feel free to confront the therapist [the facilitator], who must not only permit, but encourage, such confrontation [rebellion and anarchy]. He [the child/the student] reenacts early family scripts in the group and, if therapy [brainwashing—washing from the child's/student's brain (thoughts) respect for and fear of the father's/Father's authority] is successful, is able to experiment with new behavior, to break free from the locked family role [submitting to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will] he once occupied. … the patient [the child/the student] changes the past by reconstituting it." (Irvin Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)
"It is not individualism [the child being subject to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., having to humble, deny, die to his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society ["human relationship based upon self interest," i.e., finding one's identity in "the group," i.e., in society, in what he has in common with "the people," i.e., his carnal nature] is the necessary framework through which freedom [from the father's/Father's authority] and individuality [being "of and for self" and the world] are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx)
"The real nature of man is the totality of social relations." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach #6)
When people are concerned about your or your children's "social life" they are (more than likely unbeknownst to them) talking the language of Karl Marx instead of the language of God, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to His Word: "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 By 'shifting' communication away from the preaching, teaching, and discussing of established commands, rules, facts, and truth to the dialoguing of opinions, "top-down decision making" is "bypassed," i.e., the father's/Father's authority negated.
"Bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making, our objective centers upon transforming public opinion into an effective instrument of global politics." "Individual values must be measured by their contribution to common interests and ultimately to world interests transforming public consensus into one favorable to the emergence of a stable and humanistic world order." "Consensus is both a personal and a political step. It is a precondition of all future steps." (Ervin Laszlo, A Strategy for the Future: The Systems Approach to World Order) You can not get to consensus ("bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making") without dialogue.
By placing a child in a group of children of differing positions and opinions, encouraging him to dialogue with them, i.e., to be "positive"—to suspend, as upon a cross, any command, rule, fact, or truth that gets in the way of his continuing to dialogue with them, i.e., that hurts their "feelings," i.e., that inhibits or blocks "building relationship" with them—and not "negative"—insisting upon preaching, teaching, discussing established commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to be and do right and not wrong, siding with and rewarding those who agree with him or do right, obey, do not sin, reproving or chastening those who disagree with him or do wrong, disobey, sin, and not having fellowship with, i.e., judging and condemning those who question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack him and his standards—the children who are of and for "community" and the children who are still 'loyal' to the father's/Fathers' authority can be identified. This is what the "group grade" is all about, determining where along the spectrum of 'change,' i.e., the 'changeability' (or the resistance toward 'change') the child is at any given 'moment,' in any given situation. Dialogue moves the child toward "community," i.e., initiates and sustains compromise and 'change.' Discussion retains his 'loyalty' to authority, i.e., inhibits or blocks compromise and 'change'—at least "rapid 'change.'" It is the father's/Father's authority that is at odds with "community," i.e., 'change,' i.e., the child's carnal nature.
"Submission to authority, desire for a strong leader, subservience of the individual to the state [parental authority, local control, Nationalism], and so forth, have so frequently and, as it seems to us, correctly, been set forth as important aspects of the Nazi creed that a search for correlates of prejudice had naturally to take these attitudes into account [this statement incorrectly correlates the father's/Father's authority to Fascism, even if the father is benevolent, making all fathers Fascist or potential Fascists]." "Authoritarian submission was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures—parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "The power-relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem [how to 'change' the world]." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
It was 'change,' i.e., the negation of the father's/Father's authority that Karl Marx was most interested in. In his final thesis (Thesis # 11) he emphasized 'change': "Die Philosophen haben die Welt nur verschieden interpretiert; es kömmt drauf an, sie zu verändern," i.e., "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is change," i.e., to change it. We are all "philosophers," i.e., thinking (dialoguing , i.e., 'reasoning' with our "self" from our "feelings") about how the world "is," subject to the father's/Father's authority, preventing us from doing what we want, when we want, how it "ought" to be, where we can do what we want, when we want, and how it "can" be if we get rid of the father's/Father's authority so we can do what we want, when we want. The problem being, children grow up becoming parents themselves, sustaining the father's/Father's authority by insisting that their children obey them (authority), as their father's required of them, "repressing" them, "alienating" them from their "self" and the world of 'change,' i.e., "community."
"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." "At one end of the continuum the individual avoids close relationships, which are perceived as being dangerous. At the other end he lives openly and freely in relation to the therapist and to others, guiding his behavior on the basis of his immediate experiencing – he has become an integrated process of changingness." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
"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 & pospotency." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)
"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 come to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'" (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
God's change is different than the world's 'change.' God's change is giving your heart to the Lord, i.e., humbling, denying, dying to your "self" in order to do the Father's will. The world's 'change' is 'liberating' your heart from the father's/Father's authority so you can—esteeming/'justifying' your "self"—be your "self," i.e., be at-one-with the world in pleasure. When ministers, as 'change' agents, bring 'change' into the "church" for the sake of "building relationship" they bring the world's method of 'change' into the "church," negating the father's/Father's authority in the process. By "building relationships upon self interest" instead of having fellowship based upon the Word of God, they are able to seduce, deceive, and manipulate their members into following them down the broad pathway of the world, using them for their own pleasure and gain. By finding, through dialogue, "the peoples" "self-interest," i.e., what they "covet," ministers are able to buy and sell the souls of "their congregation." Turning them into "human resource" they are able to use them for their own pleasure and gain.
"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not." 2 Peter 2:3
"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
Without the aid of a psychologist, a "group psychotherapist," a facilitator of 'change,' a Transformational Marxist, replacing the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the preaching, teaching, and discussing of commands, rules, facts, and truth to be accepted as is (by faith) and obeyed with the child's carnal nature, i.e., dialogue, i.e., with that which is "positive," i.e., with that which is in harmony with the child's carnal nature (which we all have in common), negating that which is "negative," i.e., the father's/Father's authority that gets in the way of pleasure, 'change,' i.e., "community" can not be initiated and sustained. Without the negation of the father's/Father's authority (called "the negation of negation"), i.e., the traditional family structure, 'change,' i.e., compromise, i.e., "community" can not become a reality, i.e., the way of life.
"Once the earthly family [where the wife submits her "self" to her husband's authority and the children submit their "self" to their parent's, i.e., their father's authority, doing his will] is discovered to be the secret of the holy family [where the Son, and those who follow Him submit their "self" to His Heavenly Father's authority, doing His will], the former [the traditional family, submitting their "self" to the father's authority] must itself be annihilated [vernichtet; negated] theoretically and practically [in the children's private thoughts and social actions, i.e., in their relationship with their "self," each other, and the world]." (Karl Marx, Theses On Feuerbach #4)
The use of social-psychology, i.e., "group psychotherapy" to overcome "the neurosis of civilization," i.e., the "rule of law," i.e., the father's/Father's authority:
"using social-environmental forces to change the parent's behavior toward the child." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
"Marxian theory needs Freudian-type instinct theory to round it out. And of course, vice versa." "Third-Force psychology is also epi-Marxian in these senses, i.e., including the most basic scheme as true-good social conditions [being of the world only] are necessary for personal growth, bad social conditions [obeying the father/Father] stunt human nature,... This is to say, one could reinterpret Marx into a self-actualization-fostering Third- and Fourth-Force psychology-philosophy. And my impression is anyway that this is the direction in which they are going now." "Nakedness is absolutely right. So is the attack on antieroticism, the Christian & Jewish foundations." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)
"'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." "... the hatred against patriarchal suppression—a 'barrier to incest,' ... the desire (for the sons) to return to the mother—[which] culminates in the rebellion of the exiled sons, the collective killing and devouring of the father, and the establishment of the brother clan." "According to Freud, the drive toward ever larger unities belongs to the biological-organic nature of Eros itself." "Frauds individual psychology is in its very essence social psychology." "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.'" (Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud)
Sigmund Freud saw "the establishment of the brother clan" as "the neurosis of civilization," where "the brother clan," i.e., the town council, i.e., government, instead of negating established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., the father's/Father's authority, "deified" it instead, i.e., "introduced those taboos and restraints which," "generate social morality,'" "repressing" the people in order to keep civil order. "The overthrow of the king-father is a crime, but so is his restoration.... The crime against the reality principle [the need for order in society] is redeemed by the crime against the pleasure principle [the need for people to be "of and for self" only]: redemption thus cancels itself." (Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud) In other words, by re-establishing the father's/Father's authority in government, "the people," having to be like someone else, i.e., the father/Father, were prevented from being their "self"—as dictated by those in government. Redemption in this case is not found outside of the world but in the world instead.
"Parental discipline, religious denunciation of bodily pleasure, . . . have all left man overly docile, but secretly in his unconscious unconvinced, and therefore neurotic." "If society imposes repression, and repression causes the universal neurosis of man, . . . there is an intrinsic connection between social organization and neurosis." "The bondage of all cultures to their cultural heritage is a neurotic construction." "The core of the neurosis of individuals lay in the ‘memory-traces of the experiences of former generations.'" "Childhood remains man's indestructible goal." "In Freud's writings after 1920 the antithesis of the sexual and self-preservation instincts is replaced by the antithesis of Eros and the aggressive- destructive-death instinct. *Love and hate, love and aggression, love and the will to power." "To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit [rejecting the father's/Father's authority];" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) In other words, if government does not actively pursue the negation of the father's/Father's authority it will use it instead in order (as in "old" world order) to maintain government, "repressing" 'the people," i.e., causing "neurosis."
By bringing the child who is still 'loyal' to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., who is still holding onto, defending, preaching, teaching, and discussing established commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to be and do right and not wrong (insisting upon others doing the same) into dialogue, getting him to participate in setting aside (suspending, as upon a cross) commands, rules, facts, and truth that get in the way of relationship, doing so in order to "get along" with others, he becomes a part of "community"—compromising for the sake of his own "self interest"—that part of him that desires approval or rather affirmation from others as well as disagrees with (dislikes) the established commands, rules, facts, and truth that "get in the way" of his carnal desires of the 'moment.' This is the "private convictions" (belief-action dichotomy) that we deal with on a daily basis, where we are caught between dialoguing with our "self," 'justifying' our "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., 'justifying' our desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates (as well as our dissatisfaction with, resentment toward, hatred of the father's/Father's authority that gets in the way) or discussing with our "self" what is the right thing to do according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth that we have been taught, i.e., humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining our "self" in order to do or be right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's standards, i.e., in order to do the father's/Father's will. Without dialogue, "private convictions," i.e., the father's/Father's authority can not be negated in the thoughts and actions of "the people," allowing them to be their "self"—without the father's/Father's restraints.
"[We] must develop persons who see non-influencability of private convictions [those who have a guilty conscience when they do wrong, disobey, sin against the father/Father] in joint deliberations as a vice rather than a virtue [as being "neurotic," i.e., "negative," i.e., "the problem" instead of being "normal," i.e., "positive," i.e., contributing to the solution]." (Kenneth D. Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
"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 now for) "self" and the world only]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)
By bringing the parents into dialogue with their children, i.e., by getting them to suspend their authority, as upon a cross in order to "build relationship" with their children, the father's/Father's authority is negated, not only in the children's thoughts and actions but in the parent's thoughts and actions as well.
"For to accept that solution [where both parents and children must participate in the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus], even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [from the child's perspective, from the child's (and the parent's) carnal nature] other than that of the bourgeoisie [from the parent's authority]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)
"Once uncertainty is created in the parent how best to prepare the child for the future, the authoritarian family is moribund, regardless of whatever countermeasures may be taken." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)
Therefore sounding more like Karl Marx than Karl Marx himself (who was not yet born) Hegel could write:
"On account of the absolute and natural oneness of the husband, the wife, and the child [since all are of and for the world only—as Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote in his book, Discourse on Inequality, "the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody."—in defiance to the Word of God: "the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof." (1 Corinthians 10:26)], ... the surplus is not the property of one of them ... all contracts regarding property or service and the like fall away ... the surplus, labour, and property are absolutely common to all, inherently and explicitly." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life) In other words your spouse, your children, your property, your business, etc., and even you are not yours but society's, i.e., the community's.
"In our democratic society, any enterprise—any individual—has its obligations to the whole." "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." "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." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management) "Abe gave to all of us the democratization of the soul ['liberating' the soul from the Father's authority]." (Warren Bennis in Maslow on Management, Abraham Maslow)
For 'change,' i.e., compromise, i.e., "community" to become a part of the persons way of thinking ('reasoning') and acting, relationship, i.e., getting along with others must become the focus of life, requiring the suspending of any command, rule, fact, or truth, as upon a cross, that gets in the way of relationship, i.e., that causes division, i.e., alienation. Therefore, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' it is imperative that the father's/Father's authority, which engenders a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning be negated. Immanuel Kant's "lawfulness without law" can only be accomplished when the child's carnal nature, i.e., the child's desire to enjoy the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates (which you have in common with every person on the face of the earth) replaces the father's/Father's authority, i.e., "rule of law," which divides people between those doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth and those doing wrong, disobeying, sinning. (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment) As long as the father's/Father's authority remains in place, inhibiting or blocking dialogue, 'change,' i.e., compromise, i.e., community can not be initiated and sustained.
"The dialectical method was overthrown—the parts were prevented from finding their definition within the whole." "For the dialectical method the central problem is to change reality.… reality with its 'obedience to laws'." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)
For example: in the traditional classroom with twenty students coming from homes with differing positions on issues, i.e., differing commands, rules, facts, and truth the teacher reflects their parent's authority, 1) preaching commands and rules to be obeyed as given, teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is (by faith), discussing any questions the students might have regarding their lessons (at the teachers discretion (providing the teacher has time, the students can understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking their authority), 2) rewarding or blessing the students who obey and/or do things right, 3) chastening or punishing the students who get things wrong or disobey (in order for them to learn to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline their "self" and learn to do things right and/or obey), and 4) casting out or expelling any student who questions, challenges, defies, disregards, attacks authority. Only by bringing out the students own "feelings," i.e., their desires and dissatisfactions, i.e.., the affective domain in the classroom (through dialogue) can the traditional home (and classroom) be transcended, resulting in the students discovering their common identity, not in their parents authority but in that which they all have in common, i.e., their carnal nature. The "educator," in the dialogue classroom, does not have to tell the students to go home after school and question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parent's authority, after participating in the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus classroom, they will do that automatically when they get home from school—their 'loyalty' now being to their "self" and "the group" instead of their parent's. This applies to any "meeting" being facilitated today, in all professions, with all ages.
"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.'" (Sigmund Freud, Moses and Monotheism as quoted in Marcuse, Eros and Civilization)
"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) All "educators" are certified and schools accredited based upon their use of "Bloom's Taxonomies," i.e., dialogue in the classroom.
It is through dialogue, especially when done in a group—focusing upon "building relationships" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, i.e., anything that gets in the way of initiating and sustaining relationships—that "community" is best accomplished. It is the individual's desire for affirmation, i.e., approval from others, affirming his carnal thoughts and actions, i.e., his hearts desires that the greatest pressure for 'change,' i.e., willingness to compromise takes place. By focusing upon being "positive," i.e., accepting the child's carnal nature and discoursing being "negative," i.e., rejecting the father's/Father's authority all participants in "the group" can be more easily 'changed.'
"It is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately." "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
"Few individuals, as Asch has shown, can maintain their objectivity [their belief, i.e., their faith (trust) in authority, 'loyalty' to commands, rules, facts, and truth] in the face of apparent group unanimity [consensus]." "One of the most fascinating aspects of group therapy is that everyone is born again, born together in the group." (Irvin D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)
"The individual is emancipated in the social group." "Freud commented that only through the solidarity of all the participants could the sense of guilt [the father's/Father's authority] be assuaged." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
"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)
Kurt Lewin understood the effect the father's/Father's authority had upon the children, i.e., the next generation of citizens. He also knew how to negate it.
"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." "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." (Kurt Lewin; A Dynamic Theory of Personality)
According to Kurt Lewin, since the guilty conscience, what he called a "negative valance," was the result of the father's/Father's threat of punishment for doing wrong or for disobeying, what Lewin called "an induced field of force of an adult," preventing the child from having or doing what he desired to do or from having what he wanted to have in the 'moment,' what Lewin called "a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child," by simply removing, in the mind of the child, the father's/Father's authority, i.e., by putting the child in a "safe zone, space, or place," where he could question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack authority, negating that which is "negative" without fear of reprimand, i.e., "if this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his authority" the guilty conscience would be negated, i.e., "the negative valance also disappears." It is in an environment of dialogue, aiming for consensus, i.e., where the father's/Father's authority must be suspended in order to have "community," that Kurt Lewin's world of 'change' is initiated and sustained.
In order to initiate and sustain 'change,' i.e., community it is essential that the individual's private thoughts (desires and dissatisfactions) be 'discovered' and 'liberated in a group setting. Through the use of indicative reasoning, i.e., introducing, approving, and focusing upon "appropriate information" the facilitator of 'change' is able to move "the group" to his pre-determined outcome, cutting off deductive reasoning, i.e., "inappropriate information" which holds "the group" accountable to established commands, rules, facts and truth, unless it supports the facilitator's desired outcome..
"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." "We know how to influence the ... behavior of individuals by setting up conditions which provide satisfaction for needs of which they are unconscious, but which we have been able to determine." "If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors [our potential ability to influence or control the behavior of groups] will follow." "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." "'Now that we know how positive reinforcement works [dialoguing opinions to a consensus, i.e., dialoguing our feelings (our carnal desires of the 'moment') to a feeling of oneness ('discovering' through dialogue the common carnal desires that we can all agree on, thereby affirming ourselves, and working together, as one, in fulfilling them, we establish our carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., our "self" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority], and why negative doesn't' [the father's/Father's authority]... 'we can be more deliberate and hence more successful in our cultural design. We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled [the seduced, deceived, and manipulated] though they are following a code much more scrupulously [more government regulations and oversight (sight based management)] 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 restrain 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." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
"Community"—which is based upon compromise—is different than congregation, assembly, fellowship—which is based upon established commands, rules, facts, and truth which are held in common. Neighborhood consists of independent individuals, community does not. In essence, "community" is found in the heart of the child, in his love of pleasure, which the world stimulates and his hate of restraint, i.e., the father's/Father's authority, which gets in the way. It is in the nature (heart) of the child that "community" is initiated and sustained. Without dialogue that heart can not be 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority.
"The heart is deceitful above all things [thinking pleasure ("lust") is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's will], and desperately wicked [hating whoever prevents, i.e., inhibits or blocks it from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' it desires, i.e., "lusts" after]: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 You can not see your "heart" as being deceitful and wicked because your love of "self," i.e., your love of pleasure, i.e., "lust" is standing in the way. Not until you humble, deny, die to your "self" can you see your "heart" for what it is, i.e., deceitful and wicked, i.e., loving pleasure and hating restraint.
"And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15
"The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good. He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil." Psalms 36:1-4
"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." Ecclesiastes 11:9
"And for this cause [because men, as "children of disobedience," 'justify' themselves, i.e., their love of "self" and the world, i.e., their love of the pleasures of the 'moment' over and therefore against the Father's authority] God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [that pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth [in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ], but had pleasure in unrighteousness [in their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12
For "community" to become a reality, the father's/Father's authority must be negated:
"Community" is all about dialogue, negating the Father's authority, i.e., the gospel message, i.e., God's response to the garden in Eden, i.e., man's rejection of God "the Father's" authority.
"for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart." 1 Samuel 16:7
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Timothy 3:15, 16
"[E]very one of us shall give account of himself to God." Romans 14:12
To "purge [man] of sin with all the aids of the dialectics [of dialogue, i.e., of "self" 'justification'], therefore, is to rob him of true salvation, of his eternal destiny." (Rene Fulop-Miller, The Power and Secrets of the Jesuits)
The gospel message is all about the Father sending His only begotten son, who in obedience to Him in all things commanded, died on the cross, shedding His blood, covering our sins in order to 'redeem' us from damnation (for our sins against the Father), with the Father, raising Him from the grave, 'reconciling' us to Himself, that we might spend eternity with Him in His holiness instead of in the torments of the fire that is never quenched—waiting for all who have rejected Him and His authority.
"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
"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
"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 2:15-17
"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." James 4:4
"No man 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." Matthew 6:24
"Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin [your "self" and the world, i.e., "human nature"] unto death, or of obedience [to the Father, and his Son, Jesus Christ] unto righteousness?" Romans 6:16
"Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth." Colossians 3:2
"And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." Galatians 5:24
"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
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2019