My theory on why America is getting dumber by the second, and digging its own inevitable grave.

[scorpiomover]

Another example of a little introverted girl in an extroverted classroom.

My math teacher took away my paper when I wasn't working with a group. I did what she said after that. And what a coincidence, I failed the test! She forces everyone to get into groups and the class moves so slowly that I can't keep up.

OK. now I'm getting it. That sort of thing happens here in the UK in school as well. But usually, when I've talked to teachers about it, they agree. But the school has to follow a National Curriculum laid down by the government about how kids should learn. It's usually based on science.

It's perfectly reasonable for scientists to find that kids in school do better when working in a group. Extroverts get more motivated in a group. Even introverts need help sometimes. All that's happening, is that scientists did studies that found that kids do better when in a group. The school board followed science, and so mandated that everyone has to learn in a group, because science shows people learn better that way. The teacher HAS to make you learn in a group, because the school board have mandated that that's how she MUST teach. If she doesn't, she'll lose her job, and someone else will replace her, who will make you join in.

 

[Red myst]

Re: America is on its way to idiocracy.

Thanks for your reply and understanding.



So do you think that because people lack insight in their personality that the concepts of socialism and capitalism are not well understood? Or the other way around?

Could you clarify as I am interested in how these things affect each other.



We keep growing but is this growth progress or cancer? Looking at history we feel we made progress. But not in all things. In some things we do worse.

About the lighting: I replaced almost all my lighting now with LED. I have a LED tube in my kitchen, cost me €40,- which is a load of money. But it rocks. Excellent light and it flips on without the stutter of the old fluorescents. Only 8W. In time will save a lot of Earth.

Lack of insight into ones own personality I think can lead to poor choices. Lack if insight sometimes happens because of the way the function stack matures and develops. So Let me start by saying I am talking about reasonable mature individuals.
Reasonable mature individuals after they have shaken off the indoctrination of their immediate culture, will either choose the norm of that culture because is suites them just fine, or they will gravitate to something else.
For instance, SJ Catholics may remain Catholics because it suits them just fine. But other types who were born into the catholic faith may not "take" to it, so the find other things that make more sense to their particular type, (atheist, agnostic, Buddhist etc...)
So I think it is with particular forms of governments. Some people are just naturally cut out to in a capitalistic society, some are not.
Now both forms of government are not necessary better or worse than the other, as long as everybody is on the same page, which of course will never happen. Nature has seen to that by having multiple styles of temperament. Each temperament has its blind spots.
Governments themselves are not the problem in my eyes, but corrupt governments. Government that use people as pawns against each other. And I suppose to answer you question about type and insight, in my opinion not being self aware of your blind spots, and allowing your dominate functions to rule your life can leave you open to being used and manipulated by governments and other people. People will find your blind spot and exploit it. We are all junkies of some sort. People are all dealers of some sort. I have a guy here at my work who is always pushing to sell his vitamin packs, and vitamin club memberships I told my peers he is trying get people hooked on his product, trying to create vitamin junkies. He approaches only the muscular types because he want to exploit the health conscious attitude. He never approaches me because I don't like like the type, and I keep very much to myself, so he cant read me well enough to try.

About the lighting, I was speaking of the compact florescent bulbs. I have not tried the led bulbs yet. I will eventually. I want to see their longevity before I invest in one. I know LED are very long lasting, and believe in that technology, but they also need a dc power adapter to work. Dc power supplies go out all the time. especially cheep ones. So if your LED light quits working, The LED if probably fine
but the dc power supply broke. But since these are integrated into an assembly, you cannot fix it your self. One power surge can take out your LED lighting fixture and you will have to pay to get a new one. With a 25 cent incandescent bulb, no big deal. So that Is why I am skeptical of the new bulbs. My florescent lights were probably good, but the integrated electronic ballast went bad, and I can fix it so I have to throw the whole thing away and buy a new one.
Now, If housing were built with a separate DC circuit for lighting and other 12 volt
appliances, then all you would need is a cluster of LED's to use for lighting without having use integrated LED fixtures.
I would supply the 12 volt circuit with a couple of car batteries charged by solar. So the lighting circuit will be pure all dc components and self sufficient.

 

[digitalbum]

What about the feminization of men in society?

Our society is still male oriented. There has been a movement against that over the last decades, I guess since the 1960's.

We see commercials now with men pushing trolleys with babies, changing diapers. The 'modern man' behaves more and more like a man, with their wife being out at work and the man doing household tasks.

In the case where the man still works, often the female partner does too. When she does not, the man is still obliged to do housework, to alleviate the burden of the woman, because it is noble for a man to do so.

Recently we have seen a slight backlash here. A tc channel that actively promotes maleness. The slogan is 'More for Men!' And we get to see (violent) movies.

We also have a commercial where growling, tough men trek to a bar in the wilderness for a beer.

For decades the male perspective has been under pressure. When tow males have a conflict, there can be a fight. But then the males figured it out and move on. Can even become friends.

I experienced this myself once. There was a new kid in the class and because I felt just about the lowest of the pecking order I felt the need to establish myself as having more rights. I punched him a black eye, which is highly unlike me and, to my astonishment, got me the approval of some of my classmates, even girls! A day later we were friends and stayed friends for years. He was not mad for long about it.

Men handle conflicts differently, but we have been taught to believe that way is a bad way.

Maybe when it comes to war it is. The male dominator society has drawbacks.

I wonder what influence this rope pulling between male and female values has on society. Does it over arch the personality type situation of introversion and extroversion?

Any ideas people?

Yes, men in this country have become weenies. Due to being raised by domineering, overprotective mothers, even in a household presence with a father. The father has subsequently had his balls removed by said wife as well, as she believes neutering all the males in the family is a swell idea.

To quote fight club, which I do frequently as it says it better than I rather often, "It" being many topics and acute observations of this generation of Men,

"I can't get married, I'm a 30-year-old boy."
Tyler: "We're a generation of men raised by women. I'm wondering if another woman is really the answer we need"

 

[DaDaMan]

I don't think the primary cause of the dumbing down is the expectation on introverts to be extroverts. I think it has a lot to do with the decadent stage of American civilization\culture and the extreme alienation of the individual from himself, from society and the world at large; and the almost total lack of freedom due to environmental conditions he\she finds themselves in.

 

[Red myst]

What about the feminization of men in society?

Our society is still male oriented. There has been a movement against that over the last decades, I guess since the 1960's.

We see commercials now with men pushing trolleys with babies, changing diapers. The 'modern man' behaves more and more like a man, with their wife being out at work and the man doing household tasks.

In the case where the man still works, often the female partner does too. When she does not, the man is still obliged to do housework, to alleviate the burden of the woman, because it is noble for a man to do so.

Recently we have seen a slight backlash here. A tc channel that actively promotes maleness. The slogan is 'More for Men!' And we get to see (violent) movies.

We also have a commercial where growling, tough men trek to a bar in the wilderness for a beer.

For decades the male perspective has been under pressure. When tow males have a conflict, there can be a fight. But then the males figured it out and move on. Can even become friends.

I experienced this myself once. There was a new kid in the class and because I felt just about the lowest of the pecking order I felt the need to establish myself as having more rights. I punched him a black eye, which is highly unlike me and, to my astonishment, got me the approval of some of my classmates, even girls! A day later we were friends and stayed friends for years. He was not mad for long about it.

Men handle conflicts differently, but we have been taught to believe that way is a bad way.

Maybe when it comes to war it is. The male dominator society has drawbacks.

I wonder what influence this rope pulling between male and female values has on society. Does it over arch the personality type situation of introversion and extroversion?

Any ideas people?

I don't consider men who share in domestic responsibilities more feminine. The are some men that come off in tv and in real life as a mans man. And there are some men that come off as girlie men. These are the extreme and don't see much of. Then there are the rest of us. Just guys navigating life and relationships. Some gals like tuff guys. Some just think they like tough guys. Most people I think just want to understand and be understood.

 

[Variform]

It's perfectly reasonable for scientists to find that kids in school do better when working in a group. Extroverts get more motivated in a group. Even introverts need help sometimes. All that's happening, is that scientists did studies that found that kids do better when in a group. The school board followed science, and so mandated that everyone has to learn in a group, because science shows people learn better that way. The teacher HAS to make you learn in a group, because the school board have mandated that that's how she MUST teach. If she doesn't, she'll lose her job, and someone else will replace her, who will make you join in.

But who will check the teacher? It is not as if every hour the principal comes in to check?

It seems to me that here too the scientific paradigm stifling things. It is bad enough to me that schools only teach science and so every kid there gets deeply indoctrinated with the paradigm.

And even while ti does so it crushes some personalities.

SO the solution should be that schools learn to type kids. If you can devise a good test on a still developing child that will tell you what personality they most likely have, would you say that this is a good idea?

 

[Variform]

Re: America is on its way to idiocracy.

Governments themselves are not the problem in my eyes, but corrupt governments. Government that use people as pawns against each other.

Is it possible to have a non-corrupt government? Can a voting system be the tool to increase corruption?

We, the people, are corrupt. What we choose will reflect that. For that reason I hold any people responsible for the actions of their government.

"Americans cannot escape a certain responsibility for what is done in our name around the world. In a democracy, even one as corrupted as ours, ultimate authority rests with the people. We empower the government with our votes, finance it with our taxes, bolster it with our silent acquiescence. If we are passive in the face of America's official actions overseas, we in effect endorse them."
-- Mark Hertsgaard, author

You can replace 'americans' with any other nation for my part.

Power corrupts.

And I suppose to answer you question about type and insight, in my opinion not being self aware of your blind spots, and allowing your dominate functions to rule your life can leave you open to being used and manipulated by governments and other people. People will find your blind spot and exploit it. We are all junkies of some sort. People are all dealers of some sort.

I wonder what my blind spot is, because I am much more aware of power, corruption, indoctrination, axioms and paradigmatic thinking than anyone I ever knew. If I have a blind spot, what would it be? I don't like blind spots. I have found a few recently in my review of my past.

invest in one. I know LED are very long lasting, and believe in that technology, but they also need a dc power adapter to work. Dc power supplies go out all the time. especially cheep ones. So if your LED light quits working, The LED if probably fine

Strange. Maybe you are lagging where you live with the tech. But all the LED lighting we buy here does not come with external adapters, they just have some integrated circuitry and you replace any ancient style bulb without trouble. The fluorescents often broke down on those electronics. But I haven't heard of any breaking LED lights here yet. The bulbs we buy here pretty much are the same easy to screw in bulbs, and even handier than the fluorescents.

 

[Variform]

I don't consider men who share in domestic responsibilities more feminine. The are some men that come off in tv and in real life as a mans man. And there are some men that come off as girlie men. These are the extreme and don't see much of. Then there are the rest of us. Just guys navigating life and relationships. Some gals like tuff guys. Some just think they like tough guys. Most people I think just want to understand and be understood.

So this tv channel does it just...for what? They base their whole identity around men wanting to be manly men. They did their research for that, otherwise the whole damned channel can fail. They figured out there is a target group of men in society that wants manly values back.

So what you are saying is that they are fooling men into believing it is cool to have manly values, while in fact most men do not desire any such values?

Could it be that shallow? Or is there more to it? I have seen talkshows talk about this topic. Some good discussions actually.

Not sure where I stand in this myself. I can see the male dominator not being good for the world, which is a womb out which we come. We are not born into the world, we grow out of it. The Earth is our mother and as such vitally important to our survival.

And yet, male dominator culture is destroying this womb. We are raping the world. Cutting down forests, using all the resources just to produce unneeded junk.

One would say that we need more feminine values to base our life on. I would agree. Would women be less materialistic when they were given the upper hand in society?

There is a Sliders episode where this has happened. The female are the corporate executives, have positions of power. And before he realizes it, Rembrandt who is a singer, gets seduced by a lady who promises him a career singing, and then discards him, like some men do with women in our culture.

Ideally, both values should be in perfect balance. Or maybe we have to realise that in some parts of our culture one value would be more prudent than the other.

We have less and less male teacher in this land. Child psychologists on tv declare they are worried about it because male teachers will understand male children better.

So I wonder, would you agree that in education we should have a perfect balance of the sexes and that if a class had a male teacher one year, they must have a female teacher the next?

Or maybe a dual teaching system. Present kids with both role models simultaneously? The cost of education would rise. But what would be cost effective?

We would have kids that are less prone to bad behaviour. That would reduce costs of psychiatric care, there could be less criminal behaviour, reducing the cost for policing society.

Just some ideas.

 

[Red myst]

So this tv channel does it just...for what? They base their whole identity around men wanting to be manly men. They did their research for that, otherwise the whole damned channel can fail. They figured out there is a target group of men in society that wants manly values back.

So what you are saying is that they are fooling men into believing it is cool to have manly values, while in fact most men do not desire any such values?

Could it be that shallow? Or is there more to it? I have seen talkshows talk about this topic. Some good discussions actually.

No, there are no tv channels or shows bases on men doing manly things. Not anymore anyway. Thats not what I mean. I mean that within the cast of characters in the show or movie, there is a mix of different type of characters, and some of them are cast as that image of a "mans man" and the chemistry and interactions of the characters shows how they deal with each other and their circumstances in their own way.
Anyway I see your focus is on male domination, and what I meant by "man's man" the the activities they do and don't enjoy.
I don't look at the gender of the person doing the job as a determining factor as to how successful the outcome will be usually.
There are simply different kind of women, and different kinds of men.
Finding your self and being the person you find is what is real, not what society thinks is a real "Man" or a Woman".

 

[Red myst]

But who will check the teacher? It is not as if every hour the principal comes in to check?

It seems to me that here too the scientific paradigm stifling things. It is bad enough to me that schools only teach science and so every kid there gets deeply indoctrinated with the paradigm.

And even while ti does so it crushes some personalities.

SO the solution should be that schools learn to type kids. If you can devise a good test on a still developing child that will tell you what personality they most likely have, would you say that this is a good idea?

I thought the idea of typing children or lets say evaluating their learning style and constructing course work more tailored to individual styles would be good. but on the other hand, I would be concerned that this could stunt the development of their lesser functions because they would not be challenged on those areas. And segregating them by type may not be a good idea either, because I can visualize rivalries forming between the types. I only have some simple things I would try. I would not force group work on anybody, for one thing. And I would not force the bookworms to play at PE and recess if they want to read. I would have smaller class sizes, maybe 15 instead of 30. I don't know what they teach teachers about how to be teachers, but I would make sure they understand TYPE.

 

[Red myst]

Re: America is on its way to idiocracy.

Is it possible to have a non-corrupt government? Can a voting system be the tool to increase corruption?

We, the people, are corrupt. What we choose will reflect that. For that reason I hold any people responsible for the actions of their government.

"Americans cannot escape a certain responsibility for what is done in our name around the world. In a democracy, even one as corrupted as ours, ultimate authority rests with the people. We empower the government with our votes, finance it with our taxes, bolster it with our silent acquiescence. If we are passive in the face of America's official actions overseas, we in effect endorse them."
-- Mark Hertsgaard, author

You can replace 'americans' with any other nation for my part.

Power corrupts.



I wonder what my blind spot is, because I am much more aware of power, corruption, indoctrination, axioms and paradigmatic thinking than anyone I ever knew. If I have a blind spot, what would it be? I don't like blind spots. I have found a few recently in my review of my past.




Strange. Maybe you are lagging where you live with the tech. But all the LED lighting we buy here does not come with external adapters, they just have some integrated circuitry and you replace any ancient style bulb without trouble. The fluorescents often broke down on those electronics. But I haven't heard of any breaking LED lights here yet. The bulbs we buy here pretty much are the same easy to screw in bulbs, and even handier than the fluorescents.

Yes power corrupts, and that is one of the reasons why I do not have faith in government, or religion for that matter. I don't want to get caught up in my governments safety nets. I fear that once there, I may never get out.
As for people, they manipulate the government through lobbyist and special interest groups, and the government manipulates them back. And the rest of us suffer the consequences. People have to change first before government can change.

About the lighting, the integrated circuity is what I am talking about. The Light Emitting Diodes themselves will last a long time and save a lot of juice, but the integrated circuitry is what will probably burn out faster, or can even be damaged by a voltage spike. So I was simply saying that if you could eliminate that integrated circuitry by having a separate DC circuit for household lighting, the LEDs would be cheaper if you have to replace them as opposed to replacing the whole integrated light fixture.

 

[Variform]

There are simply different kind of women, and different kinds of men.
Finding your self and being the person you find is what is real, not what society thinks is a real "Man" or a Woman".

Your focus is heavily on individuation. I just read Jung on this and the idea is that we are not whole if we are not recognizing we are also part of the world, part of a collective.

I guess you could say there is a cultural program running parallel with whatever we find within, when questing to find yourself. And culture is not your friend, as T. McKenna used to say, who died 2 days ago in 2000.

I don't know if we are also collective creatures or to what extent. But I shy away from wholly accepting the notion that we are all but individuals and can run a strictly personal program.

 

[Variform]

I thought the idea of typing children or lets say evaluating their learning style and constructing course work more tailored to individual styles would be good. but on the other hand, I would be concerned that this could stunt the development of their lesser functions because they would not be challenged on those areas. And segregating them by type may not be a good idea either, because I can visualize rivalries forming between the types. I only have some simple things I would try. I would not force group work on anybody, for one thing. And I would not force the bookworms to play at PE and recess if they want to read. I would have smaller class sizes, maybe 15 instead of 30. I don't know what they teach teachers about how to be teachers, but I would make sure they understand TYPE.

Aye, these are important issues to take into account. But they can be addressed. I wonder why it is so hard to change the education system.

They been at it here for many years, driving teachers mad with all the new ideas. It had to be this way, then that way and they keep reforming while the core of it stays the same and leaving no adjustment to a new style in between reforms.

They are saying they want the old ways back, when you could still find schools where you learned by doing. But they keep certain things the same, and I am not happy with that.

One of the worst things is here, that they want to make it illegal to teach your own children. The collective wants to make drones of your kids. Only religious people who can prove they will teach their kids well can do so and they want to ban that too. They say it is for the good of the kids to be in contact with other kids. Yet most of these home taught kids do go to sports clubs and have social lives. I am not religious but I will fight to defend their rights.

 

[Red myst]

My theory on why America is getting dumber by the second, and digging its own...

Your focus is heavily on individuation. I just read Jung on this and the idea is that we are not whole if we are not recognizing we are also part of the world, part of a collective.

I guess you could say there is a cultural program running parallel with whatever we find within, when questing to find yourself. And culture is not your friend, as T. McKenna used to say, who died 2 days ago in 2000.

I don't know if we are also collective creatures or to what extent. But I shy away from wholly accepting the notion that we are all but individuals and can run a strictly personal program.

We are both. That's one of the internal struggles. We are all connected. But it's learning how to stay connected while at the same time protecting our own boundaries while respecting others boundaries. And no one has the answer. Or maybe there is no single answer. I think this is where faith in a god comes in. Because people believe he can accomplish what man cannot. But these same people are the ones who group up and point the fingers at the other people who do not share their particular flavor of faith and say they are the ones who will not be rescued or enter the kingdom of their god. So I just try to make my way the best I can as self reliant as I can. Not counting on government, society, or god. Doing what I can where I can.

 

[Variform]

It is an involvement. And it brings you back to the identification with the object, through the senses.

God is the ideal of the Self's highest envisioned esteem.

 

[gilliatt]

Why does society favor Extroverts? Great question. Try to ask it. Well there is a belief that altruism is the right moral ideal. They try to make it some form of a universal. They you must sacrifice everything, your life, everything you love, own desire for the benefit of any and every stranger. Extroverts are feelers, ex: What do I feel? How do I feel it? These Extroverts have deep inner conflicts, repressed emotions, emotional fits, they lose control, fear, guilt, self-doubt, holding a lot of false theories, undefined things in their head. It is a false identity with Extroverts, they are hiding their true motives.
Anyway, it all boils down to the Extroverts philosophy, there is in their minds, lives, a failure to identify the nature and causes of their emotions, failure of introspection. Extroverts are 'Irrationals', a whole bag of contradictions.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

The problem with America is its leaders' chronic campaign of propaganda against its own citizens. Citizens are being led to believe that (1) we are the best country in the world and there is nothing wrong with our country, and (2) if there is a problem it is an elusive deep-rooted problem that (3) has nothing to do with our policies and laws (4) or the people that make them.

What progress could be had if we truly had progressives in office? There is no constitutional law that dictates that a bipartisan capitalist system is the only system for America, yet the military-industrial-government-media complex would have you think otherwise. Our government incumbency is a perpetual group of old farts who only wish to help themselves and their business buddies, with an unjust negative disposition toward the non-conservative and liberal youth of America.

At this point I do think there is potential for serious change, but it would have to be through a social revolution that is not necessarily the death of our Constitution, rather the revival of it and the expulsion of all stagnant and corrupt incumbency with the induction of a government of the youth, the early 20s to mid 40s age group. If one disagrees with that age group I merely reflect the current dominant social group in America which is being exploited by an outdated system.

 

[Cavallier]

I think what has been said here can be said about all humans regardless of their nationality.

A person is smart enough, can be reasonable, and often shows compassion. A group of people are stupid, easily manipulated, and prone to violent panic.

I stopped paying for television years ago. I watch a lot of movies and documentaries. The commercials and most of the shows were irritating at best and sent me into tailspins of depression at worst.

 

[scorpiomover]

But who will check the teacher? It is not as if every hour the principal comes in to check?

Inspectors. What they're there for.

It seems to me that here too the scientific paradigm stifling things. It is bad enough to me that schools only teach science and so every kid there gets deeply indoctrinated with the paradigm.

And even while ti does so it crushes some personalities.

I don't quite know about Ti. But the educational system is quite clearly monolithic in nature.

People quite clearly do not all have the same personality type, the same way of being motivated, and the same way of learning.

However, it's more scientific to treat all people in the same way. So scientists are naturally drawn to contributing ideas that would fit monolithic educational systems. In addition, governments these days want a production-line method that turns out millions of identical products, the same as we now use with our other products, because it's soooo much more efficient that way, and much easier to manage and govern. So if scientists were going to suggest a more multi-faceted system, then they probably wouldn't be listened to anyway.

SO the solution should be that schools learn to type kids. If you can devise a good test on a still developing child that will tell you what personality they most likely have, would you say that this is a good idea?

Well, it would be a start in the right direction. You'd probably need to re-do the test every year, because kids are still growing. But if schools recognised that different kids learn the same things in different ways, then they would be able to realise that to get kids to do better in school, they have to learn faster, and that requires using the methods for each kid that will work better for him. So then kids would really be able to learn much faster, because they would be taught in the methods that work better for them. Kind of like how these days, we no longer teach all kids to write with their right hand, and now teach people to write according to what hand they find easiest to write with.