Become a more effective and powerful communicator in today’s highly polarized and polluted public square
The most pressing problem we face today is not climate change. It is pollution in the public square, where a toxic smog of adversarial rhetoric, propaganda, and polarization stifles discussion and debate, creating resistance to change and thwarting our ability to solve our collective problems.
In this second edition of I’m Right and You’re an Idiot , James Hoggan grapples with this critical issue, through interviews with outstanding thinkers and drawing on wisdom from highly regarded public figures. Featuring a new, radically revised prologue, afterword, and a new chapter addressing the changes in the public discourse since the 2016 United States election, his comprehensive analysis explores:
How political will is manipulated How tribalism shuts down open-minded thinking, undermines trust, and helps misinformation thrive Why facts alone fail and how language is manipulated and dissent silenced The importance of dialogue, empathy, and pluralistic narrative reframing arguments to create compelling narratives and spur action. Our species’ greatest survival strategy has always been foresight and the ability to leverage intelligence to overcome adversity. For too long now this capacity has been threatened by the sorry state of public discourse. Focusing on proven techniques to foster more powerful and effective communication, I’m Right and You’re an Idiot will appeal to readers looking for deep insights and practical advice in these troubling times.
Rene Descartes was a highly influential philosopher, mathematician, and scientist and is regarded as the Father of modern philosophy and mathematics. This is the biography of Descartes, and it describes the life of Descartes, in the flesh and blood, rather than a technical analysis of his philosophical, scientific, and mathematical ideas.
New Thinking Allowed with Jeffrey Mishlove Rolf Sattler is emeritus professor of biology at McGill University in Montrael, Canada. He is author of Organogenesis of Flowers, Biophilosophy: Analytic and Holistic Perspectives, and Science and Beyond: Toward Greater Sanity Through Science, Philosophy, Art, and Spirituality. Here he explains that Aristotelian logic has captured the Western intellectual mindset for many centuries. He suggests that this type of “either/or” thinking has resulted in harmful wars and violence. He points to several other systems of logic that are more precise, and also more inclusive, than Aristotelian thought. These include Taoist yinyang logic, Buddhist four-valued logic, Jaina seven-valued logic, quantum logic, and fuzzy logic. New Thinking Allowed host, Jeffrey Mishlove, PhD, is author of The Roots of Consciousness, Psi Development Systems, and The PK Man. Between 1986 and 2002 he hosted and co-produced the original Thinking Allowed public television series. He is the recipient of the only doctoral diploma in “parapsychology” ever awarded by an accredited university (University of California, Berkeley, 1980). (Recorded on October 16, 2021). For a complete, updated list with links to all of our videos, see https://newthinkingallowed.com/Listin…. For opportunities to engage with and support the New Thinking Allowed video channel — please visit the New Thinking Allowed Foundation at http://www.newthinkingallowed.org. To join the NTA Psi Experience Community on Facebook, see https://www.facebook.com/groups/19530…. To download and listen to audio versions of the New Thinking Allowed videos, please visit our new podcast at https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/n…. You can help support our video channel while enjoying a good book. To order Science and Beyond by Rolf Sattler, click here: https://amzn.to/3jHuGX3. (As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.) Our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/newthinkinga… Our Twitter page: https://twitter.com/newthinkallowed Our Instagram page: https://www.instagram.com/jeffreymish… Our LinkedIn discussion group: https://www.linkedin.com/groups/13860…
T&H – Inspiration & Motivation An enlightened and powerful speech from musician and Beatles band member George Harrison (1943 – 2001) on the experience of life, bliss and consciousness. Remember the messages he had to share with the world. When you’ve seen beyond yourself, then you may find, peace of mind is waiting there.” – George Harrison Speaker: George Harrison (1943 – 2001) Learn more: https://www.georgeharrison.com/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_… Speech: George Harrison on VH1, July 24, 1997 Produced and Edited by T&H Inspiration
ICT Tokushima Flash mob “Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9” was performed at Omotesando Hills, Shibuya, Tokyo, on Tuesday, September 13, 2016 Tokushima Prefecture is where Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 was performed for the first time in Asia. The flash mob orchestra is an event for publicizing the 100th anniversary of this first performance to be commemorated in 2018. Conductor: Keita Matsui Solo singers: Shoko Kumada, Naoko Fujii, Aigaku Kishinami, and Takahito Asai Performer: Tokushima Kinen Orchestra Chorus: Musashino Chorus
The purpose of this article, as will soon become clear, is to describe the almost nightmarish problems we encounter when trying to discuss philosophical issues. It could therefore be seen as a plea for some clearer, unambiguous definitions.
The title of an article by Paul Austin Murphy caught my eye this week: ‘The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Is Not Idealist in Nature’. As I’ve been suggesting recently that quantum mechanics is idealist in nature (in this article), I thought that I had better investigate further.
He opens immediately by saying that “there are almost as many varieties of idealism as there are idealists”, mentioning subjective, absolute, and pluralist as examples, which is obviously not intended to exhaust the possibilities. This was news to me, so I was left wondering exactly what kind of idealist I am.
The situation was complicated further when soon afterwards I read an article by Gerald R. Baron, in which he contrasted scientific realism, defined as the belief that “matter exists whether minds perceive them or not”, and idealism, the belief that “matter exists only as constructs of minds or mind”. This left me even more confused, because on that basis I could be considered both an idealist and a scientific realist, even though Baron seems to think that they are mutually exclusive. (It depends, however, on what he means exactly by ‘minds’).
To complicate the matter even further, in relation to quantum physics, Murphy makes a further distinction between idealism and subjectivism, saying that there are clear differences between them, even though he concedes that the two terms are sometimes used interchangeably, and that he had a problem disentangling the two. (He is arguing that quantum physics is subjectivist rather than idealist, as stated most clearly in our ensuing correspondence.)
Confused? I certainly was. Then, to make matters even worse, on a different theme, I entered into some correspondence with Sender Spike who had written an article on the nature of God. I have recently expressed my belief in a God both transcendent and immanent. He was not directly responding to me, but rejects this, favouring the idea of omnipresence, which he contrasts with immanence. It was not clear to me the difference between them. If I have understood the terms correctly, then I could be considered a believer in both omnipresence and immanence.
Here are the definitions as found in the Oxford English Dictionary: omnipresent means “(of God) present everywhere at the same time”, while immanent means “(of God) permanently pervading and sustaining the universe”. If God permanently pervades the universe, how could such a being not be present everywhere?
I’m going to spend the rest of the article trying to shed some light on all the above, beginning with the relationship between quantum physics and idealism. These, according to Murphy, are the beliefs of idealists (or at least the type of idealists he is discussing):
that a body ceases to exist the moment we turn our backs to it
that everything only exists in the individual mind or in some kind of collective mind
that there is no objectin idealism — we only have a subject or subjects.
I do not agree with any of those statements. The first seems especially strange, and appears to be disproved by some modern technology. For example, if I’m going out but want to watch a certain TV programme, I can set my hard drive to record it. Upon my return, if I find that the programme has indeed been recorded, it is hard to believe that the hard drive disappeared while I was out, suddenly reconstituted itself when I enter the room, and miraculously retrieved and recorded the programme even though it was broadcast in the past. And all this because of something to do with my consciousness!
Despite this, I nevertheless consider myself to be an idealist. The Oxford English Dictionary defines idealism as “any of various systems of thought in which the objects of knowledge are held to be in some way dependent on the activity of mind”. This is far simpler than the brand of idealism that Murphy is discussing, and arguing against. It would also seem to be consistent with statements made by physicists from the early days of quantum physics, two of the most notable being:
“The universe is looking less like a great machine, and more like a great thought” (Sir James Jeans)¹.
“There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together… We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter” (Max Planck)².
That is all we need to understand by the term idealism, that what we perceive to be matter is in some way dependent on the activity of mind. In that sense quantum physics would seem to be idealist.
The statement by Jeans leads one immediately to ask the question, who or what is thinking the universe into existence? The reasonably obvious answer is God (however you choose to understand that term). This might offer an answer to the hard drive recording problem. Murphy himself suggests the possibility that the object we have turned our backs on might still exist “in the mind of God” or “in some other being’s mind”. If no one else was present while I was out, that excludes the second possibility, apparently leaving only God as the possible candidate for this collapse of the wave function.
I’m not sure how seriously Murphy would take that suggestion. He says that certain passages from Heisenberg and others “have provided grist to the mill for various idealists, mystics, New Agers and whatnot”. I think I detect a somewhat pejorative tone there, so I assume that he has a distaste for such views. He may, however, have provided the answer to the issue he is discussing. After all, an immanent God, according to the dictionary, is present everywhere and permanently pervades the universe. That would be the entity which guarantees the continuity of matter whether or not we are looking at it.
This would shed light on the issue that Gerald R. Baron was discussing. He defines scientific realism as the belief that “matter exists whether minds perceive them or not”, and idealism as the belief that “matter exists only as constructs of minds or mind”. According to my understanding of idealism, both are true. Matter does continue to exist independently of the minds of observers, but does require the mind of God to think it into existence. It is therefore a construct of mind.
I’ll turn now to Sender Spike’s issue of omnipresence and immanence. Because I could not immediately understand the distinction he was making, I asked him to elaborate. This was his reply:
“I understand immanence as ‘present as a natural and permanent part of something’ (which is the Cambridge English dictionary definition). That naturally means that something which is immanent cannot be omnipresent (it is immanent within something else where it is not). That would already require two ‘substances’ plus space. If immanence (and implied duality) meant just ‘the other side of a coin’, the whole concept of immanence is moot (or illusory) because we are talking about the coin in its entirety”.
Whatever point he is making is very subtle, because it’s not immediately obvious to me what the difference is between something which is present as a natural and permanent part of the universe, and something which permanently pervades and sustains the universe. Or, if there is a difference, does it really matter? It clearly matters to Sender Spike, so I’ll try to get to the bottom of what he is saying here. If I understand him correctly, his complaint is that immanence implies something external to the material universe which permeates it. His understanding would therefore be something closer to Pantheism, if understood as “a doctrine which identifies God with the universe” (Oxford English Dictionary), therefore suggesting omnipresence. Interestingly, the same dictionary offers an alternative definition of Pantheism, a doctrine which “regards the universe as a manifestation of God”, which is what I understand by the term ‘immanence’. (The Wikipedia entry on immanence says that it “holds that the divine encompasses or is manifested in the material world”.) According to that interpretation, there would therefore be no difference between Pantheism and belief in immanence, in which case Sender Spike and I would be in agreement, when according to him we are clearly not.
So what can we deduce from all the above? As I said at the beginning, discussing metaphysical issues can be something of a nightmare, since there are some serious problems with the language used. Can we not agree upon a much clearer set of definitions?
=====================================
I hope you have enjoyed this article. I have written in the past about other topics, including spirituality, metaphysics, psychology, science, Christianity, politics and astrology. All these articles are on Medium, but the simplest way to see a guide to them is to visit my website (click here and here).
=====================================
Footnotes:
1. The Mysterious Universe, Cambridge University Press, originally 1930, quote from 1947 edition, p137
A scientist who wrote a leading textbook on artificial intelligence has said experts are “spooked” by their own success in the field, comparing the advance of AI to the development of the atom bomb.
Prof Stuart Russell, the founder of the Center for Human-Compatible Artificial Intelligence at the University of California, Berkeley, said most experts believed that machines more intelligent than humans would be developed this century, and he called for international treaties to regulate the development of the technology.
“The AI community has not yet adjusted to the fact that we are now starting to have a really big impact in the real world,” he told the Guardian. “That simply wasn’t the case for most of the history of the field – we were just in the lab, developing things, trying to get stuff to work, mostly failing to get stuff to work. So the question of real-world impact was just not germane at all. And we have to grow up very quickly to catch up.”
Artificial intelligence underpins many aspects of modern life, from search engines to banking, and advances in image recognition and machine translation are among the key developments in recent years.
Prof Stuart Russell. Photograph: Peg Skorpinski
Russell – who in 1995 co-authored the seminal book Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, and who will be giving this year’s BBC Reith lectures entitled “Living with Artificial Intelligence”, which begin on Monday – says urgent work is needed to make sure humans remain in control as superintelligent AI is developed.
“AI has been designed with one particular methodology and sort of general approach. And we’re not careful enough to use that kind of system in complicated real-world settings,” he said.
For example, asking AI to cure cancer as quickly as possible could be dangerous. “It would probably find ways of inducing tumours in the whole human population, so that it could run millions of experiments in parallel, using all of us as guinea pigs,” said Russell. “And that’s because that’s the solution to the objective we gave it; we just forgot to specify that you can’t use humans as guinea pigs and you can’t use up the whole GDP of the world to run your experiments and you can’t do this and you can’t do that.”
Russell said there was still a big gap between the AI of today and that depicted in films such as Ex Machina, but a future with machines that are more intelligent than humans was on the cards.
“I think numbers range from 10 years for the most optimistic to a few hundred years,” said Russell. “But almost all AI researchers would say it’s going to happen in this century.”
One concern is that a machine would not need to be more intelligent than humans in all things to pose a serious risk. “It’s something that’s unfolding now,” he said. “If you look at social media and the algorithms that choose what people read and watch, they have a huge amount of control over our cognitive input.”
The upshot, he said, is that the algorithms manipulate the user, brainwashing them so that their behaviour becomes more predictable when it comes to what they chose to engage with, boosting click-based revenue.
Have AI researchers become spooked by their own success? “Yeah, I think we are increasingly spooked,” Russell said.
“It reminds me a little bit of what happened in physics where the physicists knew that atomic energy existed, they could measure the masses of different atoms, and they could figure out how much energy could be released if you could do the conversion between different types of atoms,” he said, noting that the experts always stressed the idea was theoretical. “And then it happened and they weren’t ready for it.”
The use of AI in military applications – such as small anti-personnel weapons – is of particular concern, he said. “Those are the ones that are very easily scalable, meaning you could put a million of them in a single truck and you could open the back and off they go and wipe out a whole city,” said Russell.
Russell believes the future for AI lies in developing machines that know the true objective is uncertain, as are our preferences, meaning they must check in with humans – rather like a butler – on any decision. But the idea is complex, not least because different people have different – and sometimes conflicting – preferences, and those preferences are not fixed.
Russell called for measures including a code of conduct for researchers, legislation and treaties to ensure the safety of AI systems in use, and training of researchers to ensure AI is not susceptible to problems such as racial bias. He said EU legislation that would ban impersonation of humans by machines should be adopted around the world.
Russell said he hoped the Reith lectures would emphasise that there is a choice about what the future holds. “It’s really important for the public to be involved in those choices, because it’s the public who will benefit or not,” he said.
But there was another message, too. “Progress in AI is something that will take a while to happen, but it doesn’t make it science fiction,” he said.
November 2021 features an electrically charged New Moon in Scorpio, the first Eclipse of the season and the shift from relationship-obsessed Libra-Scorpio energy to the outcome-obsessed Sagittarius-Capricorn energy.
Ready or not – November 2021 may be the month when you will be swept off your feet.
Let’s take a look at the most important astrological events of the month:
November 4th, 2021 – New Moon In Scorpio
On November 4th, 2021 we have a New Moon at 12° Scorpio.
The New Moon has a strong Scorpio energy not only because we have the Sun and Moon in the sign of Scorpio, but because the New Moon ruler Mars, is ALSO in Scorpio – very powerful in the sign of its domicile. This is an extremely driven New Moon that won’t take no for an answer.
However, the New Moon in Scorpio is opposite Uranus, the planet of ‘expect the unexpected’ – so even the most minutious, well concocted Scorpio plans can be unraveled. But as always, outer planets know best, so what may feel like an unwelcome change of plans can be your best solution yet.
November 5th, 2021 – Mercury Enters Scorpio
On November 5th, 2021 Mercury leaves Libra and moves into Scorpio.
Mercury has been in Libra since August 30th; we’ve gotten so used to Libra’s diplomatic ways that Mercury’s ingress into the intense sign of Scorpio can feel like quite a challenge at first.
Unlike Mercury in Libra, Mercury in Scorpio is not interested in being nice, or in reaching consensus – Mercury in Scorpio wants to get to the bottom of things, Mercury in Scorpio wants meaningful discussions and meaningful connections.
This 3-week transit invites all of us to speak our truth, say what we mean, and mean what we say.
November 5th, 2021 – Venus Enters Scorpio
On November 5th, 2021 Venus leaves Sagittarius and enters Capricorn. Believe it or not, Venus will stay in Capricorn until March 6th, 2022!
That’s 4 months of Venus in Capricorn – Venus usually spends only one month in a single sign – and the reason Venus spends 4 months in Capricorn is of course, her upcoming retrogradation.
This is going to be an extremely intense Venus retrograde, no exaggeration! In the coming months, Venus, Mars and Pluto will line up for a fatal love affair that will force us to get real about what we truly want.
I will prepare an extensive report on Venus retrograde, but until then, make a mental note, see what happens around the time of the ingress, because these themes will be central in your life for months and perhaps years to come.
November 10th, 2021 – Mercury Conjunct Mars
On November 10th, 2021 Mercury is conjunct Mars at 7° Scorpio. This is the second time Mercury and Mars meet in their current synodic cycle. Mercury and Mars had their first rendez-vous in Libra on October 9th, when Mercury was retrograde.
Back then, Mars ignited something inside of us – a new idea, a new ideal, and left it to Mercury to explore and figure out. A Mercury-Pluto square later, Mercury has pretty much figured out the “why” and now he’s at the “how do I make it happen” stage.
More insights will come towards the end of the month, when Mercury also meets with the Sun.
November 19th, 2021 – Full Moon And Lunar Eclipse In Taurus
On November 19th, 2021 we have a Full Moon and Lunar Eclipse at 27° Taurus. This is the first eclipse on the Taurus-Scorpio axis – a very important eclipse, since it will set the tone for the following 2-year eclipse season.
The lunar eclipse is square Jupiter, asking us to set our priorities right, and it is trine Pluto, giving us that inner drive and determination to figure out what to do next.
November 21st, 2021 – Sun Enters Sagittarius
On November 21st, 2021, Sun enters Sagittarius. Happy birthday to all Sagittarius people out there!
Sagittarius season is probably the most anticipated/sought-after astrological season out there. This is when the US celebrates Thanksgiving, the holidays are near and we are filled up with anticipation and hope for the future.
November 24th, 2021 – Mercury Enters Sagittarius
On November 24th, 2021 Mercury enters Sagittarius and the mood becomes even more optimistic.
Mercury is in fact in detriment in Sagittarius, although you wouldn’t believe it when you look at your gregarious and optimistic Mercury in Sagittarius friends.
The reason Mercury is in detriment in Sagittarius is that Mercury is the planet of unfiltered perception, of zero-bias, and let’s just say that Sagittarius is not the most unbiased sign of the zodiac… the good thing is that Sagittarius is biased towards optimism and we all need to take note of the full side of the glass from time to time, right?
November 23rd-25th, 2021 – Sun And Mercury Conjunct South Node
Between November 23rd and November 25th, the Sun, and then Mercury line up with the South Node of the Moon.
When our Ego (Sun) and our Mind (Mercury) meet the karmic point of least resistance (South Node) in the sign of wisdom (Sagittarius) I can almost hear Paul McCartney singing “When I find myself in times of trouble, mother Mary comes to me, speaking words of wisdom, let it be”.
After one month of Scorpionic turmoil, it’s time to relax and let it be. “Let it be” – not to be confused with “let it go” which means to acknowledge what is otherwise an unquestionable truth – what is meant to be, will be, what is meant to unfold will unfold.
November 28th, 2021 – Mercury Conjunct Sun
On November 28th, 2021 Mercury is conjunct the Sun at 6° Sagittarius.
We are already in the middle of the Sun-Mercury cycle that started on October 9th, 2021. This is the Full Moon phase of the Mercury cycle, this is when we reap what we have sown.
The good news is that the conjunction is beautifully supported by Saturn. Our hard work will eventually pay off. Good things do come to those who wait.
Join The Age Of Aquarius Community
At the beginning of the month, we open the doors to our lovely Age Of Aquarius Community. Age Of Aquarius is the best place to learn astrology and make friends.
New, high quality astrological content is released monthly, and the new content is aligned with what’s going on in the skies. In November for example, the Topic of the Month is “Nodes And Eclipses”. This is the content you get this month:
A spookily accurate astrology and tarot forecast for your ascendant sign
New Moon goal-setting ceremony – join hundreds of members who have found success with this practice!
A guest webinar with the accomplished astrologer Mark Jones on the topic of Planetary Nodes
A training on the topic of Eclipses
An experiential member Zoom call on the topic of Eclipses and Lunar Nodes
In the community forum, new threads are posted daily. The discussions are very lively, and the topics are diverse and enticing. Just to give you an example, we have a “Naughty New Moon in Scorpio” thread that has already gathered more than 140 comments!
The great news is that you can try the community for yourself for 3 days ($1 trial). If you don’t like it, you cancel in the first 3 days from your profile settings.
If you like it and decide to stay, you get all the membership benefits, 12 months of new content, answers to all your questions, mini Solar Returns readings for your birthday etc, and everything else Age of Aquarius has to offer for 1 year!
As early as 1884, while tutoring a boy with special needs, Steiner began a lifelong interest in applying spiritual knowledge to the practical aspects of life. Steiner originally published the essay at the core of this book in 1907. It represents his earliest ideas on education, in which he lays out the soul spiritual processes of human development, describing the need to understand how the being of a child develops through successive “births,” beginning with the physical body’s entry into earthly life, and culminating in the emergence of the I-being with adulthood.
Also included here are several early lectures on education (1906-1911).
Contents: “The Education of the Child in the Light of Spiritual Science,” essay “Teaching from a Foundation of Spiritual Insight,” Berlin, May 14, 1906 “Education in the Light of Spiritual Science,” Cologne, December 1, 1906 “Education and Spiritual Science,” Berlin, January 24, 1907 “Interests, Talent, and Educating Children,” Nuremberg, November 14, 1910 “Interests, Talent, and Education,” Berlin, January 12, 1911
(Goodreads.com)
Consciousness, spirituality, biography, sexuality, androgyny, futurism, space, the arts, science, astrology, democracy, humor, books, movies and more
