<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: BUGS is Human, BUGS is Perspective</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2010/03/29/bugs-is-human-bugs-is-perspective/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2010/03/29/bugs-is-human-bugs-is-perspective/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:20:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank</title>
		<link>http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2010/03/29/bugs-is-human-bugs-is-perspective/comment-page-1/#comment-45920</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 02:42:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/?p=5488#comment-45920</guid>
		<description>Listen to his .... http://www.occidentaldissent.com/blog/rfv328105.mp3

Goto about 17:30 and listen.  Mantra think seeping out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Listen to his &#8230;. <a href="http://www.occidentaldissent.com/blog/rfv328105.mp3" rel="nofollow">http://www.occidentaldissent.com/blog/rfv328105.mp3</a></p>
<p>Goto about 17:30 and listen.  Mantra think seeping out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2010/03/29/bugs-is-human-bugs-is-perspective/comment-page-1/#comment-45919</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 16:47:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/?p=5488#comment-45919</guid>
		<description>Whether it is the military, academia, history, engineering, business, churches, anything, what makes an institution an institution is a system of organizational ranks. 


It does not matter what the mechanism that implements the system of ranks is. The mechanism can arise spontaneously, or it can be deliberately planned. It can also be subtle and unrecognized. 


All of this does not matter, the only thing that matters is that someone who possesses a mantel of authority by whatever means is believed regarding what he or she says by virtue of the sentiment: “It’s true because he or she (in authority) says it’s true”.


What people are untruthful about doesn’t matter. It is what they really believe to be true that matters. It doesn’t matter who they are or what the context is. It is what they truly believe is true that does them in. 


This is why the US military will never defeat its “asymmetrical warfare” opponents. The US military (or any police force) can never defeat a “do your own thinking” culture.  Since successful criminals are given to doing their own thinking, the police will never have a leg up on criminals. 


A “do your own thinking” culture will defeat the institution every time. 



Goethe said it best: “God save us from BELIEF”. 



Now think about it a moment: Whenever you find yourself accepting something simply because somebody you believe to be an authority says its true, you are engaging in magical practice. Words don’t make anything true, no matter who says it. 


Once you believe that words make something true, rather than what is true is true, you are back into animism and the culture of magical belief. This is an infantile culture and it is exactly where most institutions are stuck – in infantilism and magical beliefs. The more the institution is convinced that it has &quot;got it right&quot; the more vunerable it is. 


Once you understand this, you understand how weak our opponents are.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whether it is the military, academia, history, engineering, business, churches, anything, what makes an institution an institution is a system of organizational ranks. </p>
<p>It does not matter what the mechanism that implements the system of ranks is. The mechanism can arise spontaneously, or it can be deliberately planned. It can also be subtle and unrecognized. </p>
<p>All of this does not matter, the only thing that matters is that someone who possesses a mantel of authority by whatever means is believed regarding what he or she says by virtue of the sentiment: “It’s true because he or she (in authority) says it’s true”.</p>
<p>What people are untruthful about doesn’t matter. It is what they really believe to be true that matters. It doesn’t matter who they are or what the context is. It is what they truly believe is true that does them in. </p>
<p>This is why the US military will never defeat its “asymmetrical warfare” opponents. The US military (or any police force) can never defeat a “do your own thinking” culture.  Since successful criminals are given to doing their own thinking, the police will never have a leg up on criminals. </p>
<p>A “do your own thinking” culture will defeat the institution every time. </p>
<p>Goethe said it best: “God save us from BELIEF”. </p>
<p>Now think about it a moment: Whenever you find yourself accepting something simply because somebody you believe to be an authority says its true, you are engaging in magical practice. Words don’t make anything true, no matter who says it. </p>
<p>Once you believe that words make something true, rather than what is true is true, you are back into animism and the culture of magical belief. This is an infantile culture and it is exactly where most institutions are stuck – in infantilism and magical beliefs. The more the institution is convinced that it has &#8220;got it right&#8221; the more vunerable it is. </p>
<p>Once you understand this, you understand how weak our opponents are.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2010/03/29/bugs-is-human-bugs-is-perspective/comment-page-1/#comment-45918</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:23:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/?p=5488#comment-45918</guid>
		<description>The words &quot;human&quot; and &quot;perspective&quot; certainly include bitterness and resentment. 

The title &quot;BUGS is Human, BUS is Perspective&quot; is a very anti-religious statement, religion being too devoted to consolation. 

Consolation does not gain perspective. The senses of a man fully clothed in bitterness and resentment amplify, and do not diminish as the consolers would have it. 

That Establishments invariably ignore this fact is a major driver of history.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The words &#8220;human&#8221; and &#8220;perspective&#8221; certainly include bitterness and resentment. </p>
<p>The title &#8220;BUGS is Human, BUS is Perspective&#8221; is a very anti-religious statement, religion being too devoted to consolation. </p>
<p>Consolation does not gain perspective. The senses of a man fully clothed in bitterness and resentment amplify, and do not diminish as the consolers would have it. </p>
<p>That Establishments invariably ignore this fact is a major driver of history.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: backbaygrouch4</title>
		<link>http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2010/03/29/bugs-is-human-bugs-is-perspective/comment-page-1/#comment-45917</link>
		<dc:creator>backbaygrouch4</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:25:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/?p=5488#comment-45917</guid>
		<description>Rest assured that debates about angels and pinheads took place. Some perspective is in order. Not all debates are serious. In Medieval times they could be public and serious, but they could also be amusements. The rules often revolved around disproving your opponent by ridiculing his syllogisms with your own that demonstrated that he violated a formal rule of logic. The debates could be very formal, allowing only syllogisms. I attended a lecture once where a eminent  Theologian disclosed that he had refereed a formal debate between two high clergymen [cardinals] when taking his doctorate in Rome. The topic was whether a certain part of God, removed a week after His birth, stipulated not to have ascended to Heaven, would possess miraculous powers if found today. He found the evening hilarious and numbered it high in his favorite memories of Rome. The bilge Hollywood churns out is far worse. There were no TVs back then. Possibly the angels-pin routine was popular because the participants knew surefire jokes and the audience would catch all the double meanings. The undebatable perspective is that not every debate is, well, a debate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rest assured that debates about angels and pinheads took place. Some perspective is in order. Not all debates are serious. In Medieval times they could be public and serious, but they could also be amusements. The rules often revolved around disproving your opponent by ridiculing his syllogisms with your own that demonstrated that he violated a formal rule of logic. The debates could be very formal, allowing only syllogisms. I attended a lecture once where a eminent  Theologian disclosed that he had refereed a formal debate between two high clergymen [cardinals] when taking his doctorate in Rome. The topic was whether a certain part of God, removed a week after His birth, stipulated not to have ascended to Heaven, would possess miraculous powers if found today. He found the evening hilarious and numbered it high in his favorite memories of Rome. The bilge Hollywood churns out is far worse. There were no TVs back then. Possibly the angels-pin routine was popular because the participants knew surefire jokes and the audience would catch all the double meanings. The undebatable perspective is that not every debate is, well, a debate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

