rpofessionals

Book/DRAFT.md

@@ -700,7 +700,7 @@ Jacques Ellul shows that this is not the case at all, and that propaganda mostly
 *Examining Lawrence Krauss*
 I shall take as a case study one Lawrence Krauss, a Theoretical physicist who always fashions himself as a progressive, yet still wants to eat the cake he wishes to keep by crying about the destruction of his precious academia and the erasure and mockery of the scientific method as it is applied in his field and those surrounding him.
 
-It is somewhat frustrating to see as he carries both a lot of influence and expertise, while also demonstrating a wonderful case of someone second-guessing the sacred expectations of his "political side". I've seen hi collaborate with real, actual and veritable freedom fighters, such as the great Gad Saad (and perhaps this came to fruition because they have a long-standing friendship), yet he still suffers from a massive and overly complicated case of TDS himself, while keeping company with the sort of cult initiates who suffer from the very woke mind virus parasitization written about in the very book he is "tasked" with editing order to assist Mr. Saad in the finalization and deployment of his latest book.
+It is somewhat frustrating to see as he carries both a lot of influence and expertise, while also demonstrating a wonderful case of someone second-guessing the sacred expectations of his "political side". I've seen him collaborate with real, actual and veritable freedom fighters, such as the great Gad Saad (and perhaps this came to fruition because they have a long-standing friendship), yet he still suffers from a massive and overly complicated case of TDS himself, while keeping company with the sort of cult initiates who suffer from the very woke mind virus parasitization written about in the very book he is "tasked" with editing in order to assist Mr. Saad in the finalization and deployment of his latest book.
 
 It is not so much the keeping of company that is the problem but the fact that keeping company with cult initiates and adepts means constantly responding to the proposition to affirm their cult view.
 
@@ -731,15 +731,32 @@ But this is the perfect example in some ways, as he is clearly willing to expose
 
 ## Exclusion
 
-The threat of exclusion is a constantly wielded scalpel with which to make social and psychological modifications and it is nearly impossible to conceive of the fine line whereupon a balance is discovered between useful stressor and destructive disabler. How do we know that shame and the threat of lonely starvation induces healthy, desirable behaviour supporting an incontestably desirable form of development for any human? Both the liberal view and the idealized view of the communist (at least insofar as Marx himself had fantasized about) is that a human should be able to pursue their affairs without coercion (at least to the extent that they are not causing violence to others -> first order physical violence) or oppression and domination through the advantage of one's access to capital (communists).
+We are often excluded, or fear exclusion, in a variety of forms:
+- The experience you're supposed to be having
+- New possibilities, if even in the abstract sense
+- Love and affection
+- Recognition
+- Accomplishment
+- Health
+- Life
+- Social legitimacy
+- The shared resources of the social environment
+- The protections afforded by the authority over the environment
+- The gene pool
 
-Certainly any reasonable person can see that constraints and impositions are a normal part of the child-rearing process and that care and consideration are used to ensure that no child is engaging in activities and circumstances that are developmentally inappropriate, as this hinders development and introduces or worsens psychopathology, even with activities which may be harmless for an adult of sound-mind.
+Ok so some of those might be a bit more far fetched than others, but certainly there's also a consideration of how one construes the manner and form and particulars of how they might be excluded from the social environment. Whether that's professional recognition or even just basic dignity, and how one comes to perceive either of those things, it's all highly subjective. We could say that their accomplishments beign recognized might be something for some, and accomplishing the things themselves might be something for others, or that the manner in which even either of those is construed will be a mix of both factors or perhaps even a complete inversion, depending on who is in question (or everyone could be like that, and we still wouldn't be able to know for sure).
 
-Unfortunately, such a view must be placed against the queer Marxists and modern wokes who insist that any form of mitigating, preventing or censoring material of any kind on the basis of a belief that a child cannot yet be exposed to it itself a form of bigotry and oppression over children, as it infringes on the child either by reproducing oppression, keeping them from identity, prevent them from riding or disdain to liberation, and so on.
+The truth is that there are relations and the perceptions others have of ourselves inform the limit and purpose of those relations.
 
-## Professionals Permit Absurdities
+The more complexly interwoven our professional development is with other professionals, the more complicated it becomes to risk upsetting them. It serves in every capacity for those who consider or speak of their profession as their life's purpose or a defining feature of who they are and what they've done with their limited time in existence. The proportion of those professionals who would be willing to risk it all on the simple basis of needing to maintain clarity of semantics or, better yet, having to take a stand on moral and ethical grounds, is likely to be less than in "non-professional" fields
 
-Yes, this will be a play on the useless idiots argument, which proves itself time and time again and which remains a huge threat in the sense that we do need professionals, and we could benefit tremendously by having some sort of publicly-coordinated research facilities, which is what universities fulfill in some capacity, or have at least done so traditionally, even if it's come to be a situation where even those who apologized for their many missteps years ago have now come to wonder if they do more harm than good. In fact, when I refer to the broad pursuit of collectivism as though it were a cult (and yes it is). That is not to be argued in the sense of there being some formally declared membership to a specific organization, but the fact of this functioning as a cult and, because of the congruence that various domains bear towards one another, like heads of a hydra, because of their logical pursuit of the same end impossible end result, they relate to one another in a manner wherein one head supports the adoption of the proliferation and interfacing with another head.
+There is an attitude of intellectual subordination in professional disciplines as well as in the path of education which leads them to those positions, and while this is an understandable aspect of reproducing domains of knowledge and learning from those who have more experience and a deeper understanding of the subjects entailed, it's also something to be understood as being habituated and, along with the political nature of professions (both as an implication of working for survival, as well as the impact professional work has on governance and the social environment, not to mention other more specifically ideological elements which are also inherent to the reality of professional work both today and perhaps as an ever-present aspect of professions undertaken through human interest), is also the aspect by which the authentic purpose of a discipline or a professional can be undermined.
+
+Jeff Schmidt described this as being conservative, which was correct in a manner of speaking, particularly if you are thinking about it in terms of personalities and one's disposition towards risk taking, the degree to which they allow for potential chaos, and their tendency to adhere to the corporate and institutional structures as the legitimate articulation as infrastructure of the discipline.
+
+The threat of exclusion is a constantly wielded scalpel with which to make social and psychological modifications and it is nearly impossible to conceive of the fine line whereupon a balance is discovered between useful stressor, destructive disabler, or aspect which incentivizes erroneous, malicious or simply redundant behaviour. Shame and the threat of being prevented access to resources might serve as sources of effective and corrective forces in certain situations, such as with little children and preventing them from consuming poison, but how do we know the limit at which it becomes inappropriate or serves such as to cause the prevention of developing the proper incentive structures within professional disciplines?
+
+Both the liberal view and the idealized view of the Communist (at least insofar as Marx himself had fantasized about) is that a human should be able to pursue their affairs without coercion (at least to the extent that they are not causing violence to others -> first order physical violence) or oppression and domination through the advantage of one's access to capital (communists). This is a good place to ask if the common ground might, at least as far as ideological conceptions are concerned, indicate that there is a universal value at hand which should inform oume and time again and which remains a huge threat in the sense that we do need professionals, and we could benefit tremendously by having some sort of publicly-coordinated research facilities, which is what universities fulfill in some capacity, or have at least done so traditionally, even if it's come to be a situation where even those who apologized for their many missteps years ago have now come to wonder if they do more harm than good. In fact, when I refer to the broad pursuit of collectivism as though it were a cult (and yes it is). That is not to be argued in the sense of there being some formally declared membership to a specific organization, but the fact of this functioning as a cult and, because of the congruence that various domains bear towards one another, like heads of a hydra, because of their logical pursuit of the same end impossible end result, they relate to one another in a manner wherein one head supports the adoption of the proliferation and interfacing with another head.
 
 This is always the recurring programming coming from the cultists: identify a vulnerable person and suggest that their very whim must be met so long as food can be prepared. That is to say, so long as the absolute destruction of all of civilization hasn't yet resulted, the consequence of not meeting the whim of any vulnerable person whose identity can be posited as being a description of the great plight of the future existence of mankind, then it can be assumed that we'll suffer an eventual civilizational collapse, alluded to perhaps simply by saying that we are failing to evolve in our historical environment which includes such and such calamity, such as the loss of a species of fauna, or a change in the expected pattern in some particular locale.