Is there a science to happiness?

Discussions on the philosophical foundations, assumptions, and implications of science, including the natural sciences.

Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Eclogite on March 2nd, 2017, 3:55 pm 

Revolutionary » Thu Mar 02, 2017 5:58 pm wrote:@Eclogite you grew up in a different time period and a different geographical location. You can't really compare your situation to mine. Also what blog post did you read the first one where I "take people through my past" or the other one where "I talk about solutions."
I am not comparing our situations, I am critically examining the conclusions you are drawing from yours.

I chose to answer a question you asked in the first paragraph of what I believe was your first blog. True, I chose an example from my own experience because it was convenient and real examples tend to resonate more effectively than generic suppositions. Now, are you seriously maintaining that few if any individuals, raised in the US educational system over the last couple of decades, have enjoyed the same positive experiences I did half a century earlier in another country?

If you are so asserting that is where I need to see serious confirmation of that claim, else I can and must dismiss it as inconsequentially anecdotal.

To repeat, my first criticism of your work is that you have based it upon your personal experience without seeking to validate, in a systematic way, how commonplace that experience might be.
Eclogite
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Location: Around and about


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Eclogite on March 2nd, 2017, 4:07 pm 

Athena » Thu Mar 02, 2017 5:56 pm wrote:What is an example of treating "honest respect as an insult"? I can not imagine what that would be.
Sadly, I believe that you cannot, yet that is exactly how you have dealt with several of my posts. I leave the field to you. I want no more of it.
Eclogite
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Location: Around and about


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Revolutionary on March 3rd, 2017, 12:08 am 

Or you could just read the blog post I told you to read in the first place and respond to that. In fact I'm asserting the opposite of what you said I'm asserting that they have not had the same positive experiences that was my entire point...
Revolutionary
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 04 Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Revolutionary on March 3rd, 2017, 12:21 am 

Revolutionary
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 04 Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Eclogite on March 3rd, 2017, 5:24 am 

Revolutionary » Fri Mar 03, 2017 4:08 am wrote:Or you could just read the blog post I told you to read in the first place and respond to that. In fact I'm asserting the opposite of what you said I'm asserting that they have not had the same positive experiences that was my entire point...
And, for the last time, I'll step through it slowly, for it is obvious I have failed to communicate clearly. That is entirely my responsibility.

1. You are proposing a major change in the education system of the US.
2. In fact, as your nom de plume suggests, you are advocating a revolution.
3. Revolutions are expensive in terms of their human impact. There are winners and there are losers.
4. It is therefore important (I would say essential) that before deciding how that revolution should be conducted that we be sure we have correctly defined the nature of the problem.
5. You are asserting that you had negative experiences in school. I don't doubt it.
6. You further assert that these negative experiences are commonplace and are, indeed, what the majority are exposed to. You imply that practically no one has a positive experience.
7. There are two ways you could reach those conclusions. First, you could have based them upon your personal experiences, those of your friends and anecdotes encountered in the media, or online.
8. Personal experiences and anecdotes are not a sound basis on which to base a revolution. To do so is irresponsible, illogical and dangerous.
8. The second way in which you could have arrived at these conclusions concerning near universal negative educational experiences is through the careful appreciation of many studies on the matter by experienced social scientists whose peer reviewed results are published in reputable journals.
9. If the source of your conclusions is anecdote and personal experience then I consider those conclusions to be valueless and that the plans derived that are based upon them are unlikely to be worth consideration.
10. Such being the case, but acknowledging that striving to improve the educational system is a good thing, I urge you to first work towards a well supported description of the system, with its strengths and weaknesses quantified, so that pathways to improvement may be properly designed.
11. Alternatively, if your conclusions were based upon quality research, please provide the citations now.

Other than clarifying any part of the foregoing that remains unclear I do not wish to engage further in this discussion.
Eclogite
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Location: Around and about


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Athena on March 3rd, 2017, 1:34 pm 

Eclogite » March 3rd, 2017, 3:24 am wrote:
Revolutionary » Fri Mar 03, 2017 4:08 am wrote:Or you could just read the blog post I told you to read in the first place and respond to that. In fact I'm asserting the opposite of what you said I'm asserting that they have not had the same positive experiences that was my entire point...
And, for the last time, I'll step through it slowly, for it is obvious I have failed to communicate clearly. That is entirely my responsibility.

1. You are proposing a major change in the education system of the US.
2. In fact, as your nom de plume suggests, you are advocating a revolution.
3. Revolutions are expensive in terms of their human impact. There are winners and there are losers.
4. It is therefore important (I would say essential) that before deciding how that revolution should be conducted that we be sure we have correctly defined the nature of the problem.
5. You are asserting that you had negative experiences in school. I don't doubt it.
6. You further assert that these negative experiences are commonplace and are, indeed, what the majority are exposed to. You imply that practically no one has a positive experience.
7. There are two ways you could reach those conclusions. First, you could have based them upon your personal experiences, those of your friends and anecdotes encountered in the media, or online.
8. Personal experiences and anecdotes are not a sound basis on which to base a revolution. To do so is irresponsible, illogical and dangerous.
8. The second way in which you could have arrived at these conclusions concerning near universal negative educational experiences is through the careful appreciation of many studies on the matter by experienced social scientists whose peer reviewed results are published in reputable journals.
9. If the source of your conclusions is anecdote and personal experience then I consider those conclusions to be valueless and that the plans derived that are based upon them are unlikely to be worth consideration.
10. Such being the case, but acknowledging that striving to improve the educational system is a good thing, I urge you to first work towards a well supported description of the system, with its strengths and weaknesses quantified, so that pathways to improvement may be properly designed.
11. Alternatively, if your conclusions were based upon quality research, please provide the citations now.

Other than clarifying any part of the foregoing that remains unclear I do not wish to engage further in this discussion.


You appear to be in complete denial of the effect of replacing our liberal education with the 1958 National Defense Education, and therefore I feel my arguments are being disrespected.

I will search through the thread again, and see if you have addressed my arguments defending Revolutionary's position, but it seems to me the only replies I am getting from you are an objection to me saying I perceive disrespect.

8. The second way in which you could have arrived at these conclusions concerning near universal negative educational experiences is through the careful appreciation of many studies on the matter by experienced social scientists whose peer reviewed results are published in reputable journals.


Here you try to find a study that has been peer-reviewed of the negative effects of the 1958 National Defense Education Act. I just googled for that information and it appears to me all the research is about the benefits, and not one research of negative effects has been done. Prove me wrong.

Now this 1940 grade school series of textbooks on my shelve list 12 characteristics of democracy. How many of them can you name? I would say one negative effect of the 1958 National Defense Education Act is that people don't seem to know the much about democracy. I would say another negative effect of the Act is skyrocketing abortions and divorce rates and the increasing gap between the have's and have not's, and reactionary government, and a serious failure of media to keep us well informed, and the for profit corruption of all our professions. For sure the family values I grew up with have been destroyed, and it was not gays who did this. Of course, if you like you can explain what reason has to do with morality and democracy and what logic has to do with justice. Just convince me that you have a good understanding of democracy and I question what I believe is true.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Revolutionary liked this post


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Revolutionary on March 3rd, 2017, 2:12 pm 

Take a look at Coleman's Report it basically confirms what I talked about when I said about the impact on other things going on in a child's life effecting how he does in school. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... re-failing
Revolutionary
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 04 Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Athena on March 3rd, 2017, 3:28 pm 

Revolutionary » March 3rd, 2017, 12:12 pm wrote:Take a look at Coleman's Report it basically confirms what I talked about when I said about the impact on other things going on in a child's life effecting how he does in school. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... re-failing


That would not be my choice of links because from my point it is distorted by a political agenda and built on the a perverted meaning of the word "liberal". Only in the US is the meaning of "liberal" so perverted and the consequences of this distortion are harmful to social welfare, another term that in the US means something bad, but around the world, "social welfare" and "liberal" mean something good.

Another problem I have the link is the original purpose of free public education was to transmit a culture, and our system was very successful in doing this, considering the challenges and early drop-out rate of children who had to help support their families, either working with parents, or for pay which the children then turned over to their parents. We had education for good moral judgment that I believe is essential to our liberty and democracy, and a few social, economic and political problems has gotten much worse since replacing this education with education for technology. And the achievement of public education in mobilizing us for both the first and second world wars was astounding! I am not buying our school system can not transmit a culture that improves everything.

On the other hand, I would not dismiss the importance of a healthy home environment. I would just a different study to make the make point. Any of these would do

impact of family conflicts on the academic performance and ...
ir-library.egerton.ac.ke/.../Impact%20of%20family%20conflicts%20on%20the%20Ac...
by MI WANJIKU - ‎2010 - ‎Related articles
families. The purpose of the study was to find out the impact of family conflicts on the academic performance and interpersonal relationships of pupils in public ...
Relationship between broken homes and academic achievement of ...
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/articl ... 35944.html
Jun 1, 2012 - Keywords: Stable homes, broken homes, Academic achievement, gender and socio-economic ... The family is the child's first place of contact with the world. ... Another factor that may affect academic performance of students is ...
[PDF]The effects of financial stress on the academic achievement of young ...
lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9521&context=rtd
by DS Clark-Lempers - ‎1987 - ‎Cited by 2 - ‎Related articles
Family stress has been found to have an effect on children's academic performance and .... by CPA controlled for pre-farm-crisis achievement. Hypothesis: The ...
Consequences of Family Disruption on Children's Educational ... - NCBI
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov › NCBI › Literature › PubMed Central (PMC)
by F STEELE - ‎2009 - ‎Cited by 88 - ‎Related articles
The effects of family disruption may be more pronounced for some educational ... the effects of a parental divorce or death for different academic transitions.
The Effects of Family Structures on Academic Achievement.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED455300
by MK Shim - ‎2000 - ‎Cited by 23 - ‎Related articles
This study examined the effects of family structures on students' academic achievement in terms of self-reported grades. It also examined relevant factors that ...
[PDF]INFLUENCE OF BROKEN HOMES ON ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE ...
http://www.eajournals.org/.../Influence ... nce-and-...
by IV Omoruyi - ‎2014 - ‎Cited by 2 - ‎Related articles
Items 19 - 30 - impinges on students' academic achievement. .... of identity crises when the young person begins to ask such question as “Who am ... homes may impact greatly on the internal organization of the family and by extension; effect a.
[PDF]Adverse home environments and its influence on academic achievement
rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1391&context=etd
by J Chillem - ‎2015 - ‎Related articles
Jul 8, 2015 - Effects of Overall Family Influence and “Risky Family” Background .................15 .... academic achievement is established in the home environment. .... crisis does not seem to be resolving as the annual number of divorces has ...
[PDF]i The Effect of Family Poverty on Children's Academic Achievement ...
https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/ru ... 486/pdf/1/
by F Ford - ‎2011 - ‎Cited by 3 - ‎Related articles
The Effect of Family Poverty on Children's Academic Achievement: Parental .... the closeness of a neighborhood (e.g. coming together in times of crisis). Living in ...


This one about the effect of poverty is one I know from experience.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=ef ... evements&*

However, there was a significant interaction between family poverty status and parental discussion
iii in the prediction of academic achievement indicating that parental discussion is more
valuable in affluent families than in poverty stricken families.


Revolutionary, you may choose to pick one that focuses on the effect of arguing parents. Any family crisis from unemployment leading to homelessness and insecurity, to family arguing and divorce, or a death in the family can so preoccupy a student, that the student may be incapable of learning. It is like trying to watch a TV with too much static, the picture or the the subject of learning, just does not come in clearly, when we are dealing with a crisis.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Revolutionary liked this post


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Eclogite on March 3rd, 2017, 4:03 pm 

Athena » Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:34 pm wrote:You appear to be in complete denial of the effect of replacing our liberal education with the 1958 National Defense Education, and therefore I feel my arguments are being disrespected.
1. You have not demonstrated that effect in a convincing manner.
3. You have not offered an argument, but have merely kept making a series of unsubstantiated assertions.
2. Such an approach is not deserving of respect. It is typically associated with someone wishing to ram through their agenda without regard for the opinions of others.

Athena » Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:34 pm wrote:I will search through the thread again, and see if you have addressed my arguments defending Revolutionary's position, but it seems to me the only replies I am getting from you are an objection to me saying I perceive disrespect.
You mean the one where I suggested that it was not a good idea to be offended by a statement you freely stated you did not understand? The one where I reminded you that you were better than such nonsensical behaviour?

Athena » Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:34 pm wrote:Here you try to find a study that has been peer-reviewed of the negative effects of the 1958 National Defense Education Act. I just googled for that information and it appears to me all the research is about the benefits, and not one research of negative effects has been done. Prove me wrong. .
Lihshing Wang , Gulbahar H. Beckett & Lionel Brown "Controversies of Standardized Assessment in School Accountability Reform: A Critical Synthesis of Multidisciplinary Research Evidence" Applied Measurement in Education Volume 19, 2006 Issue 4

In the abstract they state "Standardized assessment in school systems has been the center of debate for decades. Although the voices of opponents of standardized tests have dominated the public forum, only a handful of scholars and practitioners have argued in defense of standardized tests."

Now here my understanding. Correct me if I have misunderstood you.
1. Standardised testing is an important aspect of the 1958 Act.
2. You believe it is a "bad idea".
3. You assert that there just aren't peer reviewed articles challenging the benefits.
4. Yet here we have an article noting that the reverse is true. Odd that, don't you think?

Now this 1940 grade school series of textbooks on my shelve list 12 characteristics of democracy. How many of them can you name?
None. I don't base my understanding of democracy upon a 1940s American textbook. I often use as my starting point in democracy the Magna Carta. Its principles were well understood and recognised by the Founding Fathers when they composed The Declaration of Independence.

I don't have a copy of the Magna Carta, though I have viewed one of the four surviving originals. I do have a copy of the Declaration of Independence, which I have read multiple times.

I would say another negative effect of the Act is skyrocketing abortions and divorce rates and the increasing gap between the have's and have not's, and reactionary government, and a serious failure of media to keep us well informed, and the for profit corruption of all our professions.
You can say it all you like, but if you cannot demonstrate it then you are merely farting in an elevator.

For sure the family values I grew up with have been destroyed, and it was not gays who did this.
Since no one in this thread has suggested it was, why are you even bringing that up. Shouldn't you also be holding blameless hockey players, greengrocers and ornithologists?

Of course, if you like you can explain what reason has to do with morality and democracy and what logic has to do with justice. Just convince me that you have a good understanding of democracy and I question what I believe is true.
I have no idea what that rant - yes definitely a rant - means or has to do with our subject.

I will say this about democracy. It was best summed up, in my opinion, by that noted bipolar, racist alcoholic, brilliant orator and wartime leader, Sir Winston. "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others."
Eclogite
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Location: Around and about


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Athena on March 4th, 2017, 3:15 pm 

Eclogite » March 3rd, 2017, 2:03 pm wrote:
Athena » Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:34 pm wrote:You appear to be in complete denial of the effect of replacing our liberal education with the 1958 National Defense Education, and therefore I feel my arguments are being disrespected.
1. You have not demonstrated that effect in a convincing manner.
3. You have not offered an argument, but have merely kept making a series of unsubstantiated assertions.
2. Such an approach is not deserving of respect. It is typically associated with someone wishing to ram through their agenda without regard for the opinions of others.

Athena » Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:34 pm wrote:I will search through the thread again, and see if you have addressed my arguments defending Revolutionary's position, but it seems to me the only replies I am getting from you are an objection to me saying I perceive disrespect.
You mean the one where I suggested that it was not a good idea to be offended by a statement you freely stated you did not understand? The one where I reminded you that you were better than such nonsensical behaviour?

Athena » Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:34 pm wrote:Here you try to find a study that has been peer-reviewed of the negative effects of the 1958 National Defense Education Act. I just googled for that information and it appears to me all the research is about the benefits, and not one research of negative effects has been done. Prove me wrong. .
Lihshing Wang , Gulbahar H. Beckett & Lionel Brown "Controversies of Standardized Assessment in School Accountability Reform: A Critical Synthesis of Multidisciplinary Research Evidence" Applied Measurement in Education Volume 19, 2006 Issue 4

In the abstract they state "Standardized assessment in school systems has been the center of debate for decades. Although the voices of opponents of standardized tests have dominated the public forum, only a handful of scholars and practitioners have argued in defense of standardized tests."

Now here my understanding. Correct me if I have misunderstood you.
1. Standardised testing is an important aspect of the 1958 Act.
2. You believe it is a "bad idea".
3. You assert that there just aren't peer reviewed articles challenging the benefits.
4. Yet here we have an article noting that the reverse is true. Odd that, don't you think?

Now this 1940 grade school series of textbooks on my shelve list 12 characteristics of democracy. How many of them can you name?
None. I don't base my understanding of democracy upon a 1940s American textbook. I often use as my starting point in democracy the Magna Carta. Its principles were well understood and recognised by the Founding Fathers when they composed The Declaration of Independence.

I don't have a copy of the Magna Carta, though I have viewed one of the four surviving originals. I do have a copy of the Declaration of Independence, which I have read multiple times.

I would say another negative effect of the Act is skyrocketing abortions and divorce rates and the increasing gap between the have's and have not's, and reactionary government, and a serious failure of media to keep us well informed, and the for profit corruption of all our professions.
You can say it all you like, but if you cannot demonstrate it then you are merely farting in an elevator.

For sure the family values I grew up with have been destroyed, and it was not gays who did this.
Since no one in this thread has suggested it was, why are you even bringing that up. Shouldn't you also be holding blameless hockey players, greengrocers and ornithologists?

Of course, if you like you can explain what reason has to do with morality and democracy and what logic has to do with justice. Just convince me that you have a good understanding of democracy and I question what I believe is true.
I have no idea what that rant - yes definitely a rant - means or has to do with our subject.

I will say this about democracy. It was best summed up, in my opinion, by that noted bipolar, racist alcoholic, brilliant orator and wartime leader, Sir Winston. "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others."


Smile, Good morning protagonist. Before I begin I want to apologize for being so antagonistic. Obviously you consider respect is very important, so when I said I felt disrespected, instead of relating to my feeling, you felt attacked, right? From there both of us have been on the defense and this made matters worse. I think both of also appreciate a good argument motivating us to think about what we think and this might salvage our relationship.

1. You have not demonstrated that effect in a convincing manner.
3. You have not offered an argument, but have merely kept making a series of unsubstantiated assertions.
2. Such an approach is not deserving of respect. It is typically associated with someone wishing to ram through their agenda without regard for the opinions of others.


I want you to know I have spent an hour on this reply and I am sorry I have addressed all your points, but already my reply is too long.

What did the National Defense Education Act do?

It totally replaced liberal education with education for technology for military and industrial purpose. Do you want to argue this did not happen, even with my post of Eisenhower's explanation?

Liberal education internalizes authority and education for technology externalizes it, because that is the fastest way to advance technology. It is not desirable for everyone to repeat every experiment, so we are taught to rely on the experts. The problem with this is addressed by Eisenhower in his farewell speech, where he say we must not tolerate the very elitism we almost worship today. You are being very reliant on others providing the information you will accept and you are using a very elitist standard, instead of assuming responsibility for getting information for yourself and being just good folk discussing something should concern all of us. Instead of investigating the truth of what another says, you are putting people on the defensive, and this has everything to do with the breakdown in our legislature and the power games the political parties are playing and the destruction of our democracy. If you want personal authority instead of the elitism of which Eisenhower warned us, start looking for information on your own so you can discuss the issues with information about them, instead of putting people on the defensive. And put a stronger focus on how people are feeling, instead of proving others are wrong or their arguments are inadequate. It is a difference of who rules, the people or authority over them.

Be very clear, I am talking about Germany and how it came to the Nazi experience. I present the concepts on a personal level, by saying this is what you are doing, and being more independent in getting information and more considerate of other people's feelings would be an improvement, so you can relate to what I am saying, but I am talking about culture change and what made the US different from Germany. This change is directly related to the change in education! You tell me how much information is enough because I know people do not read long explanations, while they also demand proof what it is being said. The following comes from Charles Sarolea's book "The Anglo-German Problem" 1915... It follows an explanation of Prussia's control over Germany even though the German population and representation in government is much large, and culturally these people are very different.

"But it is not merely the external and physical or racial, or even religions, differences between North and South, between East and West. It is more relevant to the purpose of our argument to emphasize the effect of those differences on the national character, and to point out the absolute opposition between the Prussian temperament and the German temperament, the striking incompatibility of disposition between Berlin and Munich, between Konigsberg and Cologne.

The Southern and Western German is still to-day, as he was in the days of Madame de Stael, artistic and poetic, brilliant and imaginative: a lover of song and music. The Prussian remains as he has always been, inartistic and dull and unromantic. Prussia has not produced one of the greatest composers who are the pride of the German race; and Berlin, with all its wealth and its two million inhabitants, strikes the foreigner as one of the most commonplace capitals of the civilized world. The Southern and Western German is gay and genial, courteous and expansive; the Prussian is sullen, reserved, and aggressive. The Southern and Western German is an idealist; the Prussian is a realist and a materialist, a stern rationalist, who always keeps his eye on the main chance. The Southern and Western German is independent almost to the verge of anarchism; he has a strong individuality; his patriotism is municipal and parochial; he is attached his little city, to its peculiarities and local customs; the Prussian is imitative, docile, and disciplined; his patriotism is not the sentimental love of the native city, but the abstract loyalty to the state. (Your know- American, love it or leave it- my interjection). The Southern and Western German is proud of his romantic history, of his ancient culture; the Prussian has no culture to be proud of- politically he is an upstart. Prussia is a settlement, an army, and a bureaucracy rather than a nation; but the Prussian is unswervingly loyal to the commander of that army, submissive to the chief of that bureaucracy. "

Now I have said the US has replaced its liberal education with the German model and that this goes with the German/Persian model of bureaucracy which the US also adopted, and if you can not see the parallels between what happened to Germany and what is happening to the US, then please use documentation that has been peer reviewed to argue I am wrong about the US now being what it defended its democracy against. We did not always make people carry and show ID, fire them for saying the wrong thing, and marginalize people as we doing today. We lived with principles and sentiments that opposed our present reality. Not that long ago it was against the law for property managers and employers to check our criminal recorders and credit records and deny people housing or jobs because of what is in a record. I would make a small bet, you can explain why this change is good, but could not say what is wrong with this and why we stood it against because that is true of everyone today. The democracy we were is being lost with the deaths of our elderly.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Revolutionary liked this post


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Revolutionary on March 4th, 2017, 3:55 pm 

@Athena couldn't have said it better myself.
Revolutionary
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 04 Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Athena liked this post


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Revolutionary on March 4th, 2017, 4:00 pm 

I also find it ironic that after all the damage the education system has done to me, my psyche and my individuality that I as the victim of the system have to now be the superman and come up with all the evidence and all the peer reviewed articles on why it's a bad system and a bad idea. Well for starters don't take it from me but, take it from John Taylor Gatto http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/john_gatto.html

This system was FORCED upon me and it's being FORCED on all the other youths right now. It's not their responsibility to fix it but, the system they are in if the system is being FORCED upon them.
Revolutionary
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 04 Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Athena on March 5th, 2017, 1:23 am 

Revolutionary » March 4th, 2017, 2:00 pm wrote:I also find it ironic that after all the damage the education system has done to me, my psyche and my individuality that I as the victim of the system have to now be the superman and come up with all the evidence and all the peer reviewed articles on why it's a bad system and a bad idea. Well for starters don't take it from me but, take it from John Taylor Gatto http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/john_gatto.html

This system was FORCED upon me and it's being FORCED on all the other youths right now. It's not their responsibility to fix it but, the system they are in if the system is being FORCED upon them.


I am not in full agreement with Gatto. I think he is lacking essential information about what education did right, and that distorts what his explanation.

I posted this in another thread and hope it is okay to post it here because it says so much about mind control and what we can do to help ourselves. First, it just talks about how our brains work. Not until the question and answer part at the end does it come up how we can be controlled unless we intentionally develop our thinking skills that prevent, or at least reduce, the chances of someone leading us into illogical or harmful decisions. Liberal education did much more to prepare us for logical thinking than education for technology in most schools where the budget is cut to the bone, and the focus on passing tests and getting essential federal government money.

http://www.healthofchildren.com/P/Perso ... rders.html
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Athena on March 5th, 2017, 1:51 am 

quote Eclogite.. Now here my understanding. Correct me if I have misunderstood you.
1. Standardised testing is an important aspect of the 1958 Act.
2. You believe it is a "bad idea".
3. You assert that there just aren't peer reviewed articles challenging the benefits.
4. Yet here we have an article noting that the reverse is true. Odd that, don't you think?


The standardized test most certainly is not my biggest concern. In fact it is such a small concern I don't know if we should even waste time on it. I am much more concerned about the federal control of education than I am concerned about standardized test. When I attempted to bring my concerns up with my legislator, he told me our constitution prevented the federal government from controlling education, and you might be able to think why federal control of education could be very dangerous?

Not that long ago, parents controlled schools at the local level. Not until the National Defense Education Act, did the federal government get so involved, except during the times of war. During times of war, schools were used to mobilize our nation for war. Actually, we didn't even have vocational training until 1917 when it was adopted for military reasons. IQ testing didn't begin until 1958 and that was so teachers would identify those students best suited for higher education. Do you really want information? I would be very pleased to provide it.

How aware are you of the radical change in our education system and why this change was made?

To the best of my knowledge, there is no research paper about the effect of replacing our liberal education with education for technology. There is research done on why students are failing that are supportive of what Revolutionary talks about and that is a very different subject. These students would struggle in school even if it were geared to liberal education, but they might struggle less because liberal education prepares the young for life, and education for technology prepares them to be products for industry. The point with the research of struggling students is the harm caused by family crisis or severe disadvantage, not the harm caused by the change in the purpose in education. The problems I speak of are cultural, social, economic and political, not a minority of students having a hard time is school, and I would love to find research papers on what I believe is important!


http://lwv.org/content/role-federal-government-public-education%C2%A0-historical-perspectives

Two Constitutional Amendments played an important role in public education. In 1791, the 10th Amendment stated, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Public education was not mentioned as one of those federal powers, and so historically has been delegated to the local and state governments.

In 1868, the 14th Amendment guaranteed rights to all citizens by stating “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens in the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.”...

During the 19th century the federal government involvement in education included vocational training, land grants, and the establishment in 1867 of the Office of Education. The purpose of this office was to collect information on schools and teaching that would help states establish effective school systems.

The passage of the Second Morrill Act in 1890 gave the Office of Education responsibility for administering support for the original system of land-grant colleges and universities. Vocational education became the next major area of federal aid to schools with the 1917 Smith-Hughes Act followed by the 1946 George-Barden Act focusing on agriculture, industrial arts and home economics training for high school students.....

In 1965 the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA Pub.I.89-1- Stat 27, 20 U.S.C. ch 70) launched a comprehensive set of programs including Title I program of federal aid to the disadvantaged. The Act funds primary and secondary education, while explicitly forbidding the establishment of a national curriculum. As mandated in the Act, the funds are authorized for professional development, instructional materials and resources to support educational programs and parental involvement promotion. The Act was originally authorized through 1970; however, the government has authorized the Act every five to ten years since its enactment. The current reauthorization of ESEA is called the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). NCLB also allows military recruiters to access 11th and 12th grade students’ names, addresses and telephone listings when requested.....

The United States has changed dramatically since the early debates on the role of public schools and the role of the federal government in supporting and sustaining them. The importance of education for the common good has shifted from primarily local control to state and national control, with national attention from the Federal government and national organizations. Congress is currently embroiled in a debate and stalemate over the reauthorization of ESEA, the 2001 NCLB. Major issues include the purpose and role of the federal government in education, funding, and the extent to which the federal government should play a role in public education. Areas for national debate involve school choice, accountability, teacher quality, goals, standards and above all, funding. Federal funding currently averages about 10 percent of local school budgets.

During the coming year, local and state Leagues across the United States will discuss the role of the federal government in public education with the goal of coming to consensus on a number of questions.



That is just a highlight of change and it seriously does not do the subject justice! I bolded the lines just in case the military intent is not known, or it was thought no big changes were made and there is no reason to discuss them. And what has the No Child Left Behind Act done to the subjects taught and school funding, and teaching to the test? THIS IS NOT LIBERAL EDUCATION AND WE DID HAVE LIBERAL EDUCATION UNTIL 1958. The social, economic and political ramifications are huge.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Athena on March 5th, 2017, 2:37 am 

Revolutionary » March 4th, 2017, 2:00 pm wrote:I also find it ironic that after all the damage the education system has done to me, my psyche and my individuality that I as the victim of the system have to now be the superman and come up with all the evidence and all the peer reviewed articles on why it's a bad system and a bad idea. Well for starters don't take it from me but, take it from John Taylor Gatto http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/john_gatto.html

This system was FORCED upon me and it's being FORCED on all the other youths right now. It's not their responsibility to fix it but, the system they are in if the system is being FORCED upon them.


You will love this link!

https://creativesystemsthinking.wordpress.com/2015/09/23/factory-model-education-reforms-were-designed-for-product-testing-not-children/

582384_550484314983402_348220024_n
Education reforms that attempt to enforce fixed standards, continuous data collection and high-stakes testing are applying an industrial model of factory production developed in the early part of the last century. It’s a manufacturing approach that should not be applied to children.

The factory model was developed over a hundred years ago, to ensure quality control and produce identical “consumer” products cheaply. It is NOT appropriate to use these methods with children, because their bodies and brains are designed to learn in self-directed ways that can be sabotaged by adult attempts to manipulate, measure and control them.


I am thrilled! The internet is filling up with information that was there before. It appears the backlash to Bush's No Child Left Behind Act is picking up momentum instead dying and being forgotten.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Athena on March 5th, 2017, 3:16 am 

quote Eclogite.

None. I don't base my understanding of democracy upon a 1940s American textbook. I often use as my starting point in democracy the Magna Carta. Its principles were well understood and recognised by the Founding Fathers when they composed The Declaration of Independence.

I don't have a copy of the Magna Carta, though I have viewed one of the four surviving originals. I do have a copy of the Declaration of Independence, which I have read multiple times.


I am sure you know several of the characteristics. You just aren't used to talking about them, so they didn't pop into your head. The problem is, because we aren't talking about them, our children are not learning them because our schools stopped teaching them. But in the past children learned a set of American values. It was realized the parents would learn from their children and this was important to Americanizing the immigrants. Our education was about citizenship and it is because this is overlooked by modern writers' explanations of education, that I take issue with them. The set of values in the Democracy Series Textbooks were also listed in books for adults, especially as we mobilized for the second world war, because this was very much a part of mobilizing for war. This began before we entered the war, and it was clearly geared to create the opinion that Germany was the enemy of democracy. Since the second world war followed the first world war, it was not hard to mobilize the US against Germany again. But I was just surprised to find this effort to moblize us against Germany in a text book.

Here is one list of characteristics. Different authors worded them differently.
1. Respect for the dignity and worth of the individual human personality.
2. Open opportunity for the individual.
3. Economic and social security.
4. The search for truth.
5. Free discussion, freedom of speech; freedom of the press.
6. Universal education.
7. The rule of the majority; the rights of the minority; the honest ballot.
8. Justice for the common man; trial by jury; arbitration of disputes; orderly legal processes; freedom from search and seizure.
9. Freedom of religion.
10. Respect for the rights of private property.
11. The practice of the fundamental social virtues.
12. The responsibility of the individual to participate in the duties of democracy.


Democracy is a way of life and government is only one aspect of it. Or the textbook says...

Democracy is a way of life and social organization which above all others is sensitive to the dignity and worth of the individual human personality, affirming the fundamental moral and political equality of all men and recognizing no barriers of race, religion, or circumstance.

Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Revolutionary liked this post


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Athena on March 5th, 2017, 11:36 pm 

Here is some truth about happiness.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHHPNMIK-fY

Here is an interesting theory about why depression is increasing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drv3BP0Fdi8
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby mitchellmckain on March 6th, 2017, 7:42 pm 

Athena » March 2nd, 2017, 12:06 pm wrote:
That may be your reason for what you say, but I cannot help but doubt a culture obsessed with respect is the most likely to manifest happiness and moral behavior


That may be your reason for what you say, but I cannot help but doubt a culture with respect is the most likely to manifest happiness and moral behavior


You see the argument against my point was not logical but based horrors! on the strength of being "obsessed"! A worded to trigger an emotional reaction, canceling out logic.

Incorrect. "Obsessed" points out the difference between actuality and rhetoric. Those who throw the word around like a weapon have nothing but hot air while those who just get on with embracing the challenges in life, like actually teaching the subject they are supposed to, actually show respect rather than abuse it.

Athena » March 2nd, 2017, 12:06 pm wrote:Another point of logic is culture and how we understand "respect". "We are respectful because we are respectful people. It doesn't matter who the other person is". versus "Respect must be earned."

But babbling about respect is not what makes a body respectful. It just makes them manipulative. This is the dichotomy between those give respect to others and those who just demand it for themselves. It is the difference between what we find in a free society and what we find in most prisons.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Member
 
Posts: 620
Joined: 27 Oct 2016
Eclogite liked this post


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Athena on March 6th, 2017, 10:12 pm 

mitchellmckain » March 6th, 2017, 5:42 pm wrote:
Athena » March 2nd, 2017, 12:06 pm wrote:
That may be your reason for what you say, but I cannot help but doubt a culture obsessed with respect is the most likely to manifest happiness and moral behavior


That may be your reason for what you say, but I cannot help but doubt a culture with respect is the most likely to manifest happiness and moral behavior


You see the argument against my point was not logical but based horrors! on the strength of being "obsessed"! A worded to trigger an emotional reaction, canceling out logic.

Incorrect. "Obsessed" points out the difference between actuality and rhetoric. Those who throw the word around like a weapon have nothing but hot air while those who just get on with embracing the challenges in life, like actually teaching the subject they are supposed to, actually show respect rather than abuse it.

Athena » March 2nd, 2017, 12:06 pm wrote:Another point of logic is culture and how we understand "respect". "We are respectful because we are respectful people. It doesn't matter who the other person is". versus "Respect must be earned."

But babbling about respect is not what makes a body respectful. It just makes them manipulative. This is the dichotomy between those give respect to others and those who just demand it for themselves. It is the difference between what we find in a free society and what we find in most prisons.


Babbling? now there is a respectful word. I don't know what your point is because I stop reading when people are disrespectful.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Revolutionary on March 6th, 2017, 10:45 pm 

Sometimes I don't know what separates adults from children anymore. I think Adults are just children with money.
Revolutionary
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 04 Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Eclogite on March 7th, 2017, 12:44 am 

@Athena: you have made some extensive posts. I do not intend to address each point you have made. I have a life to live and goals to achieve. Participating in forum discussions former a minor part of both.

Athena » Sat Mar 04, 2017 7:15 pm wrote:Smile, Good morning protagonist. Before I begin I want to apologize for being so antagonistic. Obviously you consider respect is very important, so when I said I felt disrespected, instead of relating to my feeling, you felt attacked, right? From there both of us have been on the defense and this made matters worse. I think both of also appreciate a good argument motivating us to think about what we think and this might salvage our relationship.
Firstly, thank you for the apology. (You may well feel, after reading this post, that my thank you is insincere. It isn't.)

While I consider respect to be important I also consider it largely irrelevant in this discussion. I am comfortable that, throughout, I have been respectful to you and Revolutionary. In contrast I see multiple instances in which you have been disrespectful to others.

When you said you felt disrespected I did not, as you suggest, think I had been attacked. I thought that you were just losing the plot. I thought you were mistaken. I thought you were being egotistical. I thought you were being unpleasant. But I did not think I was being attacked.

This did not place me on the defense, as you suggest, since I have nothing to defend. Repeatedly you assumed that when I questioned a point made by Revolutionary that I was disagreeing with him. You continued to do this after I had pointed this out. If respect were relevant to this discussion then such behaviour would have tended to diminish it.

I am not looking to salvage a relationship. I do not wish to be your internet friend. I am not interested in respecting, or disrespecting you. Such matters are an irrelevance at this time and in this thread. I want to aid Revolutionary in improving his ideas. I think his motivation is sound, but his approach is flawed, his premises are screwed up and he is way too focused on his personal experience.

That is what I would wish to discuss, not waffle about respect. If you are serious about the importance of respect then please demonstrate this by - making this thread about Revolutionary's ideas, not your wounded pride; and by ceasing this self indulgent horror at the lack of respect. (And if you are unable to contain yourself on the matter, then start a thread on the topic.)

I am sure you know several of the characteristics. You just aren't used to talking about them, so they didn't pop into your head. The problem is, because we aren't talking about them, our children are not learning them because our schools stopped teaching them.
This was in reference to the ten or twelve characteristics of democracy.

I made a sorry job of explaining what I meant. I have no interest in a single perspective on the nature of democracy that is expressed in a 1940s American school textbook. I may, or may not agree with any, some, or all of the stated characteristics. That would in no way mean that I did not understand democracy. I tried to convey to you, by mention of the Magna Carta and the Declaration of Independence that my perception of democracy was based upon sources a little more fundamental than a 1940 school text book.

I am delighted that you have found, in that text book, a clear exposition that matches your perception of democracy. Please respect others by accepting they can reach their appreciation of the concept by other routes.

In that regard I purchased for $2.00, while living in Dallas, a textbook by Kenneth Prewitt titled An Introduction to American government. It did an exemplary job of explaining and promoting democracy. It was published in 1974. That's a full sixteen years after the introduction of the Bill that supposedly halted the effective teaching of democracy in the US. Based on your assertions that should not have been possible.
Eclogite
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Location: Around and about


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Revolutionary on March 7th, 2017, 3:09 am 

@Ecloglite if you don't sign my petition you did the most farting in the elevator!!

https://www.change.org/p/betsy-devos-br ... src-no_msg
Revolutionary
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 04 Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby zetreque on March 7th, 2017, 9:41 pm 

I just want to vent my frustration right now and say that the reason I put off going to college for over a decade is because of taking English classes. Complete waste of my freaking time. It's not that I don't believe in good grammar, spelling and technique, it's that I don't believe in the way most English teachers teach the subject. It makes me hate school so much. The worst English classes I have had the teacher actually had us coloring and drawing. Like is that really what English is about? The best English teachers I ever had actually taught me sentence structure and grammar, I got A's and remained friends with into the future. The worst English classes I have had nearly made me drop out of school for wasting my time and it's so frustration. This is a serious problem when you are paying money in college.

If anything should be overhauled in the education system it's English. I don't have any specific solutions right now but I can say that it does NOT work for me!
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3007
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (6)
Revolutionary liked this post


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Revolutionary on March 7th, 2017, 9:45 pm 

@Zetreque do you mind talking about your past, family experiences and school experiences etc. I just want to know where everyone is coming from.
Revolutionary
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 04 Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Athena on March 8th, 2017, 1:39 pm 

Eclogite » March 6th, 2017, 10:44 pm wrote:@Athena: you have made some extensive posts. I do not intend to address each point you have made. I have a life to live and goals to achieve. Participating in forum discussions former a minor part of both.

Athena » Sat Mar 04, 2017 7:15 pm wrote:Smile, Good morning protagonist. Before I begin I want to apologize for being so antagonistic. Obviously you consider respect is very important, so when I said I felt disrespected, instead of relating to my feeling, you felt attacked, right? From there both of us have been on the defense and this made matters worse. I think both of also appreciate a good argument motivating us to think about what we think and this might salvage our relationship.
Firstly, thank you for the apology. (You may well feel, after reading this post, that my thank you is insincere. It isn't.)

While I consider respect to be important I also consider it largely irrelevant in this discussion.


Can we explore the logic of our disagreement? Isn't the goal to understand our experience of happiness? If we agree that is the purpose of this thread- might a person react emotionally different to being told he is "obsessing" and "babbling"; than he would react to being told he has "made a good point and I agree (or disagree) for this reason ________. The words "obsessing" and "babbling" are emotional triggers not logical arguments, and this is destructive on two levels. When emotions are aroused, people's ability to be logical is derailed with emotion. Trump is a genius at this. Secondly, which statement might make a person happy or unhappy? I sure you are going to feel much better if I flatter you than if I insult you, and I find the colonists' communications to the king amazing for their careful wording, making every effort to avoid offending the king, with the hope the king will agree with their reasoning.

My point, being respectful is important to good logic and our happiness, and the quality of our relationships and our happiness. This thread is about happiness and respect does lead to happiness and disrepect does lead to unhappiness. You might want to deny that, but denying it is not good logic.


I am comfortable that, throughout, I have been respectful to you and Revolutionary. In contrast, I see multiple instances in which you have been disrespectful to others.


Oh yes, this is another reason to be respectful. When a person believes someone is being disrespectful there is a strong tendency to play tic for tac and then threads are derailed. The post stop being about the subject and become post about the people making the post.

When you said you felt disrespected I did not, as you suggest, think I had been attacked. I thought that you were just losing the plot. I thought you were mistaken. I thought you were being egotistical. I thought you were being unpleasant. But I did not think I was being attacked.


Now I am confused? You think I did or did not respond dispectfully? Which one of those questions was a respectful one? How about "what does she mean"? Can you remember what I said that set these questions off and can review what happened?


This did not place me on the defense, as you suggest, since I have nothing to defend. Repeatedly you assumed that when I questioned a point made by Revolutionary that I was disagreeing with him. You continued to do this after I had pointed this out. If respect were relevant to this discussion then such behaviour would have tended to diminish it.


Ah, are you being defensive now? I know I have dealt with the problem of being dexlic and I am seeing the opposite of what you are saying. I see what you just said as nothing but a defense.

I am not looking to salvage a relationship.


That is the point in this thread about our happiness. The quality of our relationships makes a huge difference! It is dehumanizing to think otherwise. In history is recorded not only did the colonist word themselves very carefully to avoid offending the king, with the hope he might accept their reasoning, but also that the men who met to write the constitution could not agree on anything, until their wives convinced them to meet socially and socialize with dining and dancing. When we build good relationships we see each other in different light and are much apt to come to agreements. The quality of our relationships really matters, and so you have put much effort into convincing me you are a good guy and this is working because you are making that effort, but it seems your effort also depends on getting me to see I am the bad guy, and how much like you, really depends on who you make me feel about myself. We can truthfully say we come to this as strangers and as strangers we have misunderstandings and we regret that and get past the problem, or we can continue to fuel the problem by blaming each other for causing it. What is the respectful thing to do and what is most apt to lead to our pleasure or displeasure?
I do not wish to be your internet friend.


This has become a serious cultural problem in the US. Not only are the people in the US dehumanizing and wanting to avoid relationships, but they are not understanding what this has to do with the culuture they have created. Niether do they understand the importance of good manners when dealing with strangers. Wecan avoid offending eachother, when are complete strangers to each other, by followingt rules of good manners. To refuse to do this, creates a culture that agressive and combative. It leads to things like killing people because they are a different race or different religion or different ethenicity. We are in serious trouble right now because we basically the accepted the culture the Prussians gave the Germans. You apparently do not want to others as human beings?
I am not interested in respecting, or disrespecting you. Such matters are an irrelevance at this time and in this thread.


Such matters have everything to do this thread. How can you not see that?

I want to aid Revolutionary in improving his ideas.
Ah, why do you think someone who wants to avoid our humanness and ignore the quality of relationships is the best person to improve someone else's thinking?

I think his motivation is sound, but his approach is flawed, his premises are screwed up and he is way too focused on his personal experience.
As I have repeatedly said, sticking to the subject instead of making your post about someone else's fault, would void comments about you being disrespectful.

Out of time, I must run. Can you reply with logic instead of your opinons about others?
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Revolutionary liked this post


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Braininvat on March 8th, 2017, 1:56 pm 

That is what I would wish to discuss, not waffle about respect. If you are serious about the importance of respect then please demonstrate this by - making this thread about Revolutionary's ideas, not your wounded pride; and by ceasing this self indulgent horror at the lack of respect. (And if you are unable to contain yourself on the matter, then start a thread on the topic.)
- Eclogite

Dear god, please, noooo. No one start a thread on that topic, please. This has all been thrashed out in Feedback and elsewhere, quite sufficiently.

Please, everyone, look at the OP and post on the topic, and confine your personal issues to PM or email with whoever you have an issue.
User avatar
Braininvat
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5667
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills
Revolutionaryzetreque liked this post


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Revolutionary on March 8th, 2017, 10:12 pm 

@Eclogite

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM-5NFY1C3c&t=1067s look at 27:40 to 31:00 EXPLAINS YOU THE BEST!!

"Once you get stuck into a paradigm, now you're not open to exploring new perspectives. Not opening to questioning the self evident assumptions that your paradigm makes PLACING THE BURDEN OF PROOF ON OTHERS TO CONVINCE YOU DEMANDING THAT THEY EXPLAIN EVERYTHING THROUGH YOU THROUGH YOUR PARADIGM AND YOUR PARADIGM ONLY!! ESPECIALLY SEEN WITH HYPER RATIONAL PEOPLE"
Revolutionary
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 04 Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Revolutionary on March 8th, 2017, 10:23 pm 

@Eclogite your imagination is crippled by a paradigm lock... you close yourself off from new experience. With out experiencing alternatives you get stuck in your mind and trapped... Anyway that was the best YouTube vid I've seen in a while.
Revolutionary
Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 04 Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Braininvat on March 9th, 2017, 11:01 am 

My mod note (above) was a reminder to refrain from ad hominems and personal issues with other members style or state of mind. Apparently that message didn't come through as clearly as I'd hoped.

This will.
User avatar
Braininvat
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5667
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Is there a science to happiness?

Postby Eclogite on March 9th, 2017, 12:46 pm 

Revolutionary » Thu Mar 09, 2017 2:23 am wrote:@Eclogite your imagination is crippled by a paradigm lock... you close yourself off from new experience. With out experiencing alternatives you get stuck in your mind and trapped... Anyway that was the best YouTube vid I've seen in a while.
Given that I am in agreement with a substantial portion of what you are saying and proposing wouldn't that suggest that you too are crippled by a paradigm lock?

Given that I located useful links to help you reach out to the relevant persons in your community when you seemed unaware of how to do this suggests I am open to seeking new resources.

Given that I have read a substantial number of your blogs suggests I may be open to new experiences.

But these are all irrelevancies. My objective from the outset was to offer you advice on how you might better proceed in convincing others. You have chosen to reject that advice. That is your right. I am disappointed you have chosen that approach, but it is what it is.

However, since you do not wish my advice and have misinterpreted my motivations for offering it, there is little point in me polluting your thread further. I remain hopeful that, on reflection, you will be prepared to step outside your current paradigm long enough to explore some of my points with an open mind. Thank you.
Eclogite
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Location: Around and about
Revolutionary liked this post


PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy of Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests