Plato: Thoughts are the soul communicating with herself.
If anyone has known a schizophrenic then you may also know that it is because of some sound or picture that invaded their thoughts which sent them mad. So possibly, any invasion of my time with self, a time to integrate past experiences could send someone mad. However if there is no interference with our own thoughts and ideas we sometimes choose to write down our conclusions and share our ideas with others socially.
With all of the information all of the time we can decide what is best for us. In short informed choices. If all of the information comes from one source then we are not informed we are being told how it is, no matter our experience. In short an invasion of our thoughts (schizophrenic) or Internet censorship(communication rape).
We are all learners and so become peers and mentors who (hopefully) lead by example. Will communication improve and teach us about other concepts, perhaps greater than our current learning capacity, or even of our current leaders learning capacity? Leaders who sometimes have other motives, including money and power over human rights.
Organisation is positive and constructive. I want to hear from the learners because there is always constructive ways to communicate with them. Like education should be free. Why? Because if there were no schools or teachers who were paid then parents would stay home and teach their children for free.
But instead we pay teachers to teach so parents can go and earn a living. When we pay teachers we are saying, "Hey thanks for teaching my child, while I'm at work or whatever. How much are you worth? What I am worth. Similarly, nurses look after our sick.
So should there be free education for students? Well if parents stayed home to teach them it would be free. Therefore education is free and should remain that way. So should there be free medical treatment for everyone? Well if parents stayed home to care for their sick they would do it for free. Therefore medical treatment and care is free and should remain that way.
Are we going to argue that sick and uneducated people should be left to their own problems and ills because their families were too busy?
Should there be Internet censorship?
Well if people can't communicate how do they find practical outcomes?
Benefits include no bombing, less violence, less inflation, no prisons, less deaths, less risks, more respect, better health, less fear and more certainty etc.
So should there be free speech so people can communicate in order to realise practical outcomes?
Inquiries and objections are free speech. Feedback is free insight into how you are seen in the real world, with respect to all other things. If there is more than one person, then to get positive and constructive outcomes, Charles S. Peirce's pragmatism, sends a clear unequivocal message that reasoning has a role. Public reasoning forms new ideas and perhaps better ideas because of more information.
Current information from many diverse communities who have experienced outcomes that change and shape the real world. It is my understanding that the real world is a lie and therefore must treated and interpreted by expression, criticism and valid information from many sources.
Valid information in the real world is few and far between - invalid information, lies and propaganda purported to be true. By brainstorming new ideas and by inference - provoking a response can sometimes invoke the conscience of the ordinary man and can lead to the truth. Aggressive Sceptics! When people lie it makes it ten times harder to achieve their goals. When politicians lie it makes it ten times harder for the community to achieve their goals.
Charles S. Peirce's pragmatism:
Before we can attack any normative science, any science which proposes to separate the sheep from the goats, it is plain that there must be a preliminary inquiry which shall justify the attempt to establish such dualism (5.37).
"A sign," Peirce tells us,
. . . is something which stands to somebody for something in some respect or capacity. It addresses somebody, that is, creates in the mind of that person an equivalent sign, or perhaps a more developed sign. That sign which it creates I call the interpretant of the first sign. The sign stands for something, its object (2.228).
A word has meaning for us in so far as we are able to make use of it in communicating our knowledge to others and in getting at the knowledge that others seek to communicate to us. That is the lowest grade of meaning (8.176).
The meaning of a word is more fully the sum total of all the conditional predictions which the person who uses it intends to make himself responsible for or intends to deny.
Peirce tells us, pure rhetoric. Its task is to ascertain the laws by which in every scientific intelligence one sign gives birth to another, and especially one thought brings forth another (2.229).
Peirce's later work, his classification of signs and the semiotic as a whole is by no means complete; it is as if the later Peirce had an overabundance of potentially fruitful insights, which would require another lifetime to exploit fully. However, it was Peirce who remarked that the opinion which is fated to be ultimately agreed to by all who investigate is the truth, and the object represented by this opinion is the real (5.407).
The full exploitation of what any one man begins is, for Peirce, a matter for the community of investigators to complete, and that completion may be indefinitely far away (5.408).
Given Peirce's view of scientific inquiry as a community effort, with the community extended in time as well as in space, it would be unreasonable to expect him to come to closure in all that he began. Certainly his semiotic is a phase of his work which he did not complete. But he began it, and pointed out a variety of possible paths to follow, paths promising both to the Peirce scholar and to the semiotician with only a passing interest in Peirce. It is to be hoped that we will ably make use of the guideposts he left us.
THE MOUSE: There is no other way. Open yourself up! Tell the truth and shame the devil.
Pilger said White House knew Saddam was no threat Australian investigative journalist John Pilger says he has evidence the war against Iraq was based on a lie which could cost George W Bush and Tony Blair their jobs and bring Prime Minister John Howard down with them.
Graffiti: What they see is what you get Father David Equal, a community leader has described the graffiti as the response to neglect by Australia's leaders, and the mainstream media, who have discriminated against people, recently.
Civil Liabilities: Howard's diversity? I had a dream? The war criminal, Prime Minister, John Howard, who only yesterday was claiming he was showing diversity has stepped up pressure on the states to support plans to increase the war criminal, Federal Attorney-General's powers to ban terrorist organisations, [scapegoats and patsies for the Coalition of the Killing's illegal and degrading resource wars in the Middle East.]
On the treatment of prisoners at the NSW HRMU A prisoner's sister's letter, from her brother: Following our phone conversation some weeks ago I would like to set out a few points on the treatment of prisoners in the High Risk Management Unit at Goulburn (Super Max) (Guantanamo Bay).
Australian communication rape Using the Internet to communicate thoughts and expose corruption. Opposed to the Governments line, 'Material on the Internet that would be regarded by a 'reasonable person' as inciting violence, offensive and for 'menacing purposes'.
Watchdogs slaughtered in NSW On Tuesday the Carr Government reduced transparency and accountability yet again and New South Wales is in danger of becoming entrenched with cronyism and intimidations with the Carr Labor Government that continues to slaughter the watchdogs.
The punishment: Is the 'crime' The punishment is the crime according to retired chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia Justice Alistair Nicholson. "Smacking a child ought to be seen as assault".
NSW Community News Network Archive