These are the questions and answers (as listed on facebook) based on queries, concerns and sought-after counsel over the last couple of weeks during conversations with parents, educators, crossing guards and other concerned folks. To simplify, compile, condense and provide distinct information addressing everyone’s considerations, I’ve structured these tell-tale topics into these specific questions and answers. Here again, are the questions:
Q # 1 – WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PHYSICIST AND A PRESCHOOL TEACHER ?
Q # 2 – WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “RE-FORM” AND “TRUE FORM” ?
Q # 3 – WHAT exactly ARE CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS ~ AND, HOW and WHEN ARE THE ‘CORE ELEMENTS’ OF CRITICAL THINKING SET ?
Q # 4 – WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “MATH” AND “ARITHMETIC” ?
Q # 5 – HOW DOES THE NATURAL “SCIENTIST” AND “MATHEMATICIAN” IN EVERY CHILD get MUMBLED OR DESTROYED ?
Q # 6 – WHAT
View original post 1,756 more words
Title Translation ~
We the people, (the authoritative people) would prefer that you avoid thinking for yourselves. We’d just prefer that you continue believing that you are thinking for yourselves and making your own decisions and valuable judgments (which includes voting for us so that we may continue ruling over you.)
Hey folks, did you know that there is actually “no law” or amendment mandating that you must pay “income taxes”? That’s right! I’m still looking to be sure, because although I’m certain this is true, I’m usually the sort of person inclined to investigate things for myself, it’s just too much a part of being an independent researcher. The reality is that the tooth fairy and knowing the condition of Schrodinger’s Cat are more real than the supposed requirement of having to pay income taxes.
And for that matter, so is the elusive idea about “consciousness”, which is starting…
View original post 1,490 more words
If we had to use one term to describe the conditions of all of the world’s challenges, it would have to be “emotional poverty”. But first, let’s define the word challenge. When we speak of humanity’s challenges, this ought to include a variety of symptoms. Typically, the first thing that comes to mind are difficult problems and adversities. The other type of challenge involves how to create viable solutions for the difficulties of degradation, destitution, limited resources, oppression, upheaval in communities and societies, war, political corruption and of course, inequality and poor economic distributions – better known as poverty. On the other hand, besides tackling problems and finding solutions, there is the challenge of advancing human progress with far more brilliant ideas, whether #technological or #humanitarian and figuring out, in general how higher human development can actually move forward.
What ought to be at the forefront of all of…
View original post 1,559 more words
#AtlasShrugged and #Ayn Rand are undoubtedly interchangeable terms. Ayn Rand’s heartache was that the premises of Atlas Shrugged were misunderstood. Indeed they were, because to understand them required our routine thinking to be set to a different dial or frequency.
Apparently, the centrally core concept of Ayn Rand’s philosophy can be coined in a single saying she herself promoted during her lifetime, which was: “Identify the dominant philosophy of a country and you can predict its future”. In my opinion, anyone who doubts this is living in a parallel reality of a non-such reality. Nothing could be further from the truth. She did denounce altruism ~ her definition being that it was a philosophy that demanded self-sacrifice. I think there is little need to bundle altruism and self-sacrifice together. Altruism is better defined as the mutual recognition of one’s own abilities and also the recognition of others’ abilities — since we are equipped to make judgments and think for ourselves. Self-sacrifice in its most debased and redundant form yields little to nothing both for the sacrificed and the sacrificer in terms of long-term gains.
It’s only logical that this difference ought to be clarified, because most definitions are based on the knowledge of guilt, so it only follows that Rand’s definition of #altruism would be based on this theme. What’s clear is that she wanted to change this theme and get people to tap into a new legacy of human progress.
It seems readily clear that Rand was concerned with Morality and Discipline as well. With the new definition of “altruism” as the non-guilty refinement of one’s uniquely innate and creative abilities, then the consciousness of “discipline”, or the discipline of consciousness can be automatically scripted with moral consciousness, either without self-denial or self-sacrifice. If a person is so intuitively inclined to exact and apply their well-developed abilities, how much time would really be wasted in self-sacrificing pursuits or immoral acts — especially when we have so much more to offer ourselves and others with our best abilities in full bloom, while connecting with others in the same esteem ?!?! Indeed, the need for conscious morality would just fall away and intuitive intelligence – and the intuitive development of all of our abilities would just step into its place, and with far superior attributes.
Developing our abilities is the most supreme and ideal way to help yourself and help others – equally. After all, you may be so full of self-sacrificing ideas that you are constantly possessed of, or obsessed with helping others, but if you are incompetently unprepared, uncultivated and disengaged from a refined version of general and unique abilities, there is little that you will be able to do for others. In other words, if you want to help others, you need to know how.
Ayn Rand was concerned because she noticed that a common narrative of self-worth was actually undermining a truer version of self-worth. The prevailing rhetoric pronounced that our only real worth is dependent upon submitting to the will of the state, or the prevailing theme of a society – rather than be independently creative thinkers and doers. This dependent thought system depends on a surplus or majority of a population to collectively denounce individualism – while even simultaneously believing that individualism is operating openly and freely. A more underlying theme of Ayn Rand’s justifiable rants was that we are hardly better than the authoritative abusers of society when we inadvertently admit ourselves to being abused and surrendering our ability to think and feel for ourselves. When we are disabused of our own natural abilities, we are just passing through time and space, while the authorities of life in the world, as we know it, program us to plug into their agenda and elite purposes.
Ayn was certain that a society of well-developed individuals will amass into a better quality society, because the relationships between individuals and groups of individuals would have a truer common base and common denominator of being authentically and creatively attuned to the truer nature of humanity, which is to think creatively, out of the box, be inquisitive and even be more collectively drawn to one another because of the attraction of our individualities.
Was Any Rand so correct in so many of her assumptions? Objectively, this question must be answered with an absolute and resounding ‘yes’. However, the only tool that Ayn had at her disposal for promoting a solution was the very same body that she knew was responsible for the self-sacrificing theme that was pervasive all throughout history. That “body” was the system of socio-political-economic operations that needed to be reformed. Overall, this is why she endorsed individualism and it is also why she promoted democratic freedom and feared the socialization (or citizen dependency) on/of government.
You know how they say you can take or remove a person out of a rebellion, but you can never take the rebel out of that person. So unless you take the self-sacrificing and abusing mindset out of the people that run the socio-political-economic operations of the world, it’s hardly different than even successfully eliminating the system altogether. Unfortunately for Ayn Rand, she just missed living in the age of Neuroscience. If you want to help people change the way that they are thinking and feeling, then you need to change the system that operates the thinking and feeling abilities of people. This system is our brains.
The bulls-eye factor for the non-self-sacrifice and altruistic individualism for a moral collective society of people with genuinely functional relationships depends on a full spectrum of brain development. We need to change from the inside out, rather than from the outside in, and any changes we make require the use and active involvement of our brains. Ninety percent, yes 90% of our brains’ flexibility for constant individual learning and independently creative thinking are built during the stage when 90% of the brain’s structural neuro-net, or basic framework is constructed. This happens during and only during the first five years of human brain development. This phase is the one altruistic favor that has salvaged any possibility of truly reforming humanity.
Remaining ignorant, or conveniently dismissing the significance of the necessities and natural requirements of the first ‘5’ years of brain development is the single most dangerous thing we can do, both as individuals and as a collection of people forming societies and nations. The full activation, development and highest potential of our brains (aka, our individual abilities) is completely dependent upon understanding and cultivating young children’s brain potential – and following or imitating the same measures for ourselves in the pursuit of improving the state of affairs in the world.
The highest development and order of our abilities are contingent upon the intuitive development of all of our cognitive abilities that depend on creative thinking and precognitive decision-making. Without the core elements of these skills being established during the first five years of development, then even the most supreme ideals and philosophies are doomed to failure. We need our brains for everything we feel, think, say, do and intend to act upon, and we need the assets of our brains full potential to be able to fully expound upon our uniquely innate abilities, as well as the common abilities and interests we share with one another as a species.
Understandably, Ayn Rand was broken-hearted and frustrated by people’s tendency to put faith into a real ideal that she presented as fiction, while she maintained a sense of trust that people would be able to comprehend the gravity of her non-fictional message — somewhere, somehow the twain failed to meet cohesively on common ground.
Many people buy into the idea that the circumstances for the existence of the earth make its entire formula a naturally extended set of patterns and estimated conditions that would surely have been repeated over and over again at various times, and at various locations around the universe. Hence, this idea follows the assumption that many planets like ours exist, and hence again, this also is supposedly a reason, albeit an unreasonable reason, to believe that the universe created itself. In other words, there could never have possibly been any sort of supreme or divine intelligence that would have calculated the precisely measured ingredients necessary to produce our planet, solar system and galaxy — or, in the words of the Author Eric Metaxas ~ “Today, there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life – every single parameter of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls apart”.
Sounds to me much like the making of a cake. That is, that precise measurements of particular ingredients must be carefully and smoothly mixed together under the most ideal circumstances for creating and baking a cake. Even scientists are humbly recognizing the logic of a supreme mathematician and scientific genius behind the creation of the universe, our galaxy and all celestial bodies.
To divert slightly from this theme, there was a highlight in today’s local news broadcast, featuring a possible candidate – a woman – proclaiming “Don’t you someday want to see a woman president”? Well, perhaps! But merely for the sake of having a woman as president?Here’s the thing: In a household, it is normally typical, whenever a house is out of order, to be organized and arranged by the matriarch of the house, or at least for the household mother to be the leader of the re-organization process, and thus designates various responsibilities to other household and family members. So yeah, do we want to have a woman as president? Well, if our whole nation is out of order, which it is, then it would be naturally logical to have a woman president (however, from my personal perspective, not the one that was proclaiming her appeal to be the first female candidate to actually win the presidency, because I have serious reservations about her ability to organize and clean house in logical and common sense appropriations that would be beneficial …)
What are these ramblings all leading to? There are many issues about the human condition, and for every issue and concern of humanity, we need to get ahead of the curve. We need intelligence and information, rather we need intelligent information that will exceed all of our present ideological assumptions and narratives about humanity, our routine endeavors, our traditional pursuits, our destructive activities, and our possible higher purposes.
Most obviously, most issues are argued with ideological premises, one trying desperately to be superior over every other ideology. But the most logical and ideological approach would be formidably settled by measuring any ideology with a criteria that represents the tool that we use to advocate everything we think, say and do — that consistent criteria would logically be our brains. What ideology will reign most supreme over any ideology — and propose the best strategies for addressing the challenges of humanity and the ideologies that support them? Clearly, the ideology that will best support and reign supreme over all ideologies would be the ideology of how our brains work — that is, how our brains are really meant to work if we were actually working the full potential of our brains that have been designed and derived from the creation of the universe, or our original Creator. Convincing others that we are going to make them see the logic of our own ideology is a war that has been in the making and ongoing for thousands of years. The best concession is for everyone to concede to the superiority of authentic human brain potential. By doing this, we will literally leave every ideology in the dust — as we realize how inferior every ideology is compared with the full parameters of genuine human brain development.
Religious texts and scientific evidence are great mediums to help us connect with our creation and its origins, but the best medium our creator and creation gave us was our brains — literally a tool of knowledge that existed with all of the encoded information we’d need to understand ourselves, our universe and one another. This tool and text of knowledge existed long before any written religious resources or scientific evidence. Our BRAINS are our best ideological platform of unity and understanding for all human beings, for all times and all circumstances, regardless of culture, race, gender or anything else.
In the world of education — the area of knowledge that ought to best support and enhance our ability to use our brains – – is suffering because we misunderstand the original and creative aspects that fulfill and activate our brains truest, highest and most altruistic potential. As much as 90% of our brains develop in the first five years of life – much in the same way that at least 90% of our planet had to be developed with all of its precise ingredients in order to support our complex life systems – and in particular, us humans who are capable of understanding our planet and universe, and all of its processes and elements.
Just as our planet was prepared as a cradle to support our forms of life, so do the first five years of the brain’s development require our knowledge and ability to cradle its full potential.
The field of education does so little to support EARLY EDUCATION as the cradle of our brains’ developments, as well as being the FOUNDATION FOR EVERYTHING WE WILL DO, SAY, FEEL AND THINK OVER OUR LIFETIMES.
Like religious and scientific ideologies that squabble about which premise is superior over another — so it is that we have the same challenge in Education. Preschool is the foundation for all developments in life, as opposed to just being the formal educational foundation for life. Rather than spend time competitively squabbling about what theme or preschool style is superior over another, what ALL early educators ought to be doing is banning together to challenge the national rhetoric regarding the misconceptions about how preschool is merely preparation for elementary school. The general consensus about early education is that it is a field onto itself that has little relevance and impact on society as a whole, when it has a 100% rate of relevance to EVERYTHING that unfolds in any society or nation.
The Campaign “Save The Hug” – to put hugging back into preschool – is only the first step in banning together as Early Educators to educate the general public about the impact of preschool brain development and how it affects, and indeed should define, everything in the development of every society and nation. Unbeknownst to everyone is the reality that Preschool Teachers and Early Educational Specialists are the ones in the position to responsibly reform education and subsequently, Early Educators are tasked with reforming Society in general. This task cannot be left to Politicians, as they are incompetently equipped to understand early brain development. However, Early Educators need to become more masterful about the parameters of early brain development themselves.
Reforming Education means starting with the fundamentals and therefore, reforming education means first reforming preschool development. It means there needs to be a “think tank” of professionals who are mastering the fundamentals of human brain development – of the preschool stage of brain development, whether children attend a formal preschool facility or whether they are being formally educated at home by their own parents – which of course, would be the most ideal situation. Such a criteria, or advisory board ought to be lead and spear-headed by the National Dept. of Education, rather than by the Dept. of Health, or Social Services. Education ought to be aligned and designed by the science of the brain, or by Neuroscience, and for that matter, EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE DESIGNED BY THE BRAIN and the Neuroscience that properly describes the way the brain develops – and that means that the Dept. of Health and Social Services also need to get on board with the fundamental evidence of brain development. Essentially, and eventually this means that everyone ought to feel compelled to understand the preschool stage of brain development, because WE ALL need to have a better understanding of the fundamentals of the tool , namely our brains, that best equip us to understand our creation, and our creator.
Education must stop being suppressed and arranged to suit, or defer the consequential effects of lawsuits. Once again, the only fair and formidable strategy to defeat this ridiculous parameter for deciding and devising absurd practices in education is acknowledging genuine brain development. As such, real brain development must become the criteria for implementing intelligent brain/education curriculums (for every level and grade of learning) and indeed for all endeavors, pursuits and offices of society. But most importantly of all, REAL BRAIN DEVELOPMENT must become the criteria for every fervent IDEOLOGY of humanity, whether religious or scientific or otherwise.
How do you defeat an IDEOLOGY? – with an Ideology that surpasses all ideologies – and that would be the ideal ideological parameters of human brain development.
#Damn the #DepartmentOfEducation – it’s time to put #Hugging Back into #Preschool.
The Department Of Education has done nothing to represent the genuine interests of preschool children.
Zero #HUGS lead to more #THUGS.
Preschool children have zero leverage or representation in Washington D.C.
WHO IS LOBBYING FOR PRESCHOOL CHILDREN? WHY IS CURRICULUM BASED ON LAWSUITS and HEALTH CONCERNS – there has always been and always will be germ issues.
EDUCATION, CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND HIGHER HUMAN PROGRESS ALL DEPEND ON HUMAN BRAIN DEVELOPMENT. And Human Brain Development is BUILT on the FOUNDATION FOR EVERYTHING IN LIFE (aka: Preschool cognitive/brain development).
HUGS = HIGHER I.Q.’s
ZERO HUGS = LOWER I.Q.’s
The Dept. of education has done next to nothing to represent the most important stage in life — the stage that is the foundation for everything in life. The Dept. of Education has merely designated credible names to a “committee” that supposedly researching “what’s best” for early education. Could they all really be that UN-COGNIZANT of the rules and roles of early human brain development?How is it that they’ve come up with nothing at all? Even very concerned European Educators addressed our U.S. Dept. of Education leader, literally asking, “What’s wrong with you guys, don’t you care about your young children at all”? He humbly confessed to this accusation, but did it prompt him to do anything to improve preschool education? He’s done NOTHING !!
If you think a,b,c and 1,2,3 prepares preschoolers for EVERYTHING IN LIFE, you’ve been deceived. And if you believe the non-hugging policy in the name of health and safety, then you’ve been doubly deceived.