About

The goal of the Linux-Society (LS, dating back to the mid-90s as a professional club and tech-mentoring group) has been a purely-democratic Information Society; many of the articles are sociological in nature. The LS was merged with Perl/Unix of NY to form multi-layered group that included advocacy, project-oriented learning by talented high school students: textbook constructivism. Linux has severe limitations such that it is useless for any computer that will, say, print or scan. It is primarily used for webservers and embedded devices such as the Android. (Google is high-invested in it).

Technology is problematic. During the heyday of technology (1990s), it seemed it had the democratic direction Lewis Mumford said it should have in his seminal
Technics and Civilization.

Today, we are effectively stuck with Windows as Linux is poor on the desktop and has cultured a maladaptive following. Apple is prohibitive, and all other operating systems lack drivers, including Google's Android, an offshoot of linux.

In the late 90s there was hope for new kernels such as LibOS and ExoOS that would bare their hardware to programs, some of which would be virtual machines such as Java uses. Another important player was the L4 system that is a minor relation to the code underlying the Apple's systems. It was highly scientific but fell into the wrong hangs, apparently, and has suffered from having no progress on the desktop. There is a version, "SE" that is apparently running in many cell phones as specialized telecom chips, but is proprietary. SE's closed nature was only recently revealed, which is important because it is apparently built from publicly-owned code as it is not a "clean room" design it may violate public domain protections, and most certainly violates the widely-accepted social contract.

Recent attempts to enjoin into L4 development as an advocate for "the people" have been as frustrating (and demeaning) as previous attempts with the usual attacks to self-esteem by maladaptive "hacks" being reinforced by "leadership" (now mostly university professors).

In short, this leaves us with Windows, which is quite a reversal if you have read earlier posts here. But, upon Windows, we have free and open software development systems in the forms of GTK+ (the windows usually used on Linux) and the Minimal GNU Windows (MinGW and MSYS) systems. It is very likely this direction that development should go (that is, on Windows) such that s/w can then be ported to a currently-valid microkernel system that includes a driver system that can be adapted by hardware developers to reuse of their windows and apple drivers.

From a brief survey of L4, it appears that the last clean copy was the DROPS system of the early 2010s, was a German effort that used the Unix-like "OS kit" from an American University.

If we are going to be stuck on Windows, then it seems that a high level approach to free and open systems integration, such as creating fully transparent mouse communication between apps so that they can seamlessly work together as a single desktop (rather than deliberately conflicting). This would be very helpful for GIMP and Inkscape, both leading graphics programs that are strong in the special ways, but suffer from an inability to easily interrelate.

Another important issue is the nature, if you can call it that, of the "geek" or "hack." Technology is formed democratically but "harvested" authoritarian-ly --if I can coin a term that Mumford might use. Authority is plutarchy: a combination of aristocracy and oligarchy that is kept alive after all these millennia by using, or maligning, the information society as a part of the civilizing (or law-giving) process that embraces the dialectic as its method. Democratic restoration, that is to put humanity back on an evolutionary (and not de-evolutionary) track, I think, will require the exclusion of the "geek" from decision-making. As is, the free/open s/w culture attempts to give leadership to those who write the most lines of code --irrespective of their comprehension of the real world or relationship with normal users. We need normal people to somehow organize around common sense (rather than oligarchic rationalism) to bring to life useful and cohesive software and communications systems.

Interestingly, the most popular page on this site is about Carl Rogers' humanistic psychology, and has nothing to do with technology.




Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Setting up a dlink wifi router on a hughesnet satellite connection



To make a long story short, this solution provides wired ethernet, but not wifi, service.

  • Connect the laptop to the router and the router to the hughesnet device, which I will call a satmodem for convenience.
  • Connect to the dlink router web-based interface (server) via ethernet cable, (198.162.0.1) and
  • Go to the LAN settings and change the router's address to 198.162.1.1 to differentiate it (probably) from the satmodem address. It also puts the local on a different address range than the satmodem uses to connect to the router.
  • Connect it to the satmodem via ethernet and let it get DHCP information if you didn't before.
  • Then, in the router data you will find the DNS server address (DNS means name to IP address conversion service); this you have to put in your laptop adapter DNS fill-in form. That is in the adapter (ethernet, or local network) properties that are accessible through the network sharing center (different windows boxes have different routes to it :\ ), and you may have to dig a little to find it.
  • When editing the adapter properties, also give the laptop a distinct address such as 198.162.1.2 .. or .. , .3, or .4 for more laptop -- which will disable DHCP.
  • The gateway may also have to be set, which is the new router address: 198.162.1.1

If anything is missing, please leave a comment!

It seems that these settings should also make the wifi work, but not so. During the process I got intermittent wifi service, but I have no clue how that happened, or didn't.

It also seems that you should be able to set up an independent wifi network using the dlink alone, but that didn't happen either. Again, no clue, except that I do know that quality control evaporated as the "loyal opposition" got pushed to the curb in the early 2000s as their livelihood was shipped to the bizarre ancient oligarchy of the exact opposite side of the planet apparently by another bizarre oligarchy. A third bizarre oligarchy flew airplanes into the exact building where we were at the time having Public Domain planning meetings to oust yet another bizarre oligarchy that can be described in terms of monolithic kernels. Any clues? A decade later we are still scratching our heads but we have successfully applied the OSI model to the human brain, which, we believe, is a step in the right direction: emotional communication. It actually explains the monolithic kernel issue pretty well, and may explain the micro kernel adherence to it as a server system riding on top of the microkernel in emulation, as there is no other explanation. I actually recall the initial company that put the satellites, or birds, up in the sky went kablooey and the guys that got control of the stock wanted to burn them in the atmosphere! I figured it would take a good long year to get out of the hole, but it has been a very long decade since then, nearly exactly since we experienced the final straw, the terror attack by the Saudis (friends of.. ??). Don't be too hard on the pharms, though, when you start to really hate capital, as zoloft and welbutrin kept us alive enough to plan a recovery, which if we are correct about the layered stuff, may be the final recovery. The Yes Men have a lot to say about how disaster such as the terror attack I mentioned is leveraged for capital construction; they focus on Katrina.



Xplorenetsucks.com has apparently been "hacked" by SaMo_Dz, so I provide the text that I used below from the google cache:

View Full Version : Wireless Router Woes

New Denmark
01-02-2010, 06:31 PM
Hello all, I myself am (sadly) a Xplornet user. I seem to be having an issue with allowing my wireless router to work on Xplornet.

I have both a Linksys wireless router, and a D-Link wireless router.

I can connect just fine when I plug my desktop into the modem, but I can't connect when I plug my router into the modem, and then the desktop into the router. It seems to me that the router isn't taking the IP address from the modem.

I did a term of networking in college, so I'm pretty familiar with this sort of stuff, yet I can't seem to figure it out. After plugging the Router into the Modem, it should be allowing me access to the internet, but it won't. Any help would be appreciative, this is has been a nightmare since my little brother just got a laptop for Christmas. Thanks.
fasteddy2
01-02-2010, 06:54 PM
With your PC connected to the modem, open a command prompt and type in "ipconfig /all".
Record the ip address, sub-net mask, gateway, and dns settings. Now plug your PC in your router and open a browser, and type in http://192.168.0.1 (may have to restart the PC before this works).
Go into the Internet setup and select the static IP option, and enter in the data you recorded from ipconfig /all.
Reboot the modem and router (in order: modem, then router) and you should get connected.
Of course all this assumes that your router is fresh out of the box and has not been configured before...
New Denmark
01-02-2010, 07:38 PM
Well the thing is that we will have multiple devices utilizing the wireless router (two desktops, a laptop, and an iPhone).
fasteddy2
01-02-2010, 08:50 PM
Okay so we start from the basics:
a) you are just using one router (not cascading two routers)?
b) if you follow my original instructions, can you connect any device to the Internet (through one router)?
c) do any of your devices connect with a "wired" connection to the router?
d) can any of your devices at least see the wireless router (not the Internet, just the SSID of the router)?

Please keep in mind that we have no idea how you have connected any of your devices (including the Xplornet equipment) so we are stumbling in the dark until you enlighten us with your current configuration...
New Denmark
01-02-2010, 09:16 PM
A) Correct, just using one.
B) Haven't had a chance to try it.
C) No, when it's wired, it still doesn't work.
D) All devices can detect the SSID, and can connect to them, but computers see (local only).

My setup right now is my modem going through to one desktop via ethernet. What I would like to do is have my modem go through to the wireless router, and have all desktops be able to connect to the internet via the router (wirelessly).

We can all connect to the router when the Modem is plugged into it, but it says (local only) still.
xplornetsuck
01-02-2010, 10:09 PM
Hughesnet?

Change the default LAN IP of the router to something like 192.168.1.10

If you are on Hughesnet the modem has an IP that unfortunately coincides with the default IP of some routers.
New Denmark
01-02-2010, 10:19 PM
This would be a Hughes Router, but the service is Xplornet. I'll see what I can do and I'll get back to you on that. Thanks!

Keep the suggestions coming, I've wasted a couple days on this already. XD
xplornetsuck
01-02-2010, 10:29 PM
the Hughesnet modem has it's own internal IP for the diagnostics screens.
192.168.0.1

So your routers LAN ip needs to be different. Otherwise a conflict.


Hughesnet faq's.
http://consumer.hughesnet.com/faqs.cfm
And FAP policy.
http://consumer.hughesnet.com/faq/fair-access-policy.cfm
Amber
01-03-2010, 11:07 AM
New Denmark, I don't know if this will help you or not.

I have a Linksys router Wireless-G WRT54G. I used the disc that came with it to install it. A while back, I had to reinstall it for some reason and I did have problems with it the first time, I couldn't get on the internet. I have written a note to myself to NOT use their 'Secure Easy Setup' option if I have to install it again. My note says to 'do it manually', although I can't remember the exact procedure I used to do that. I'm sure the installation ran through whatever steps were necessary to do that.

I hope things work out for you.

Oh, I think I remember...my router doesn't like little power brownouts and little millisecond long outages, and I had to reinstall after one of those. I now have the router plugged into a power bar with a backup battery.
New Denmark
01-03-2010, 11:34 AM
Well I tried changing the IP of the router, to no avail. I am planning on sticking to the D-link router from now on, as it has greater range.

After resetting nearly everything and it saying local only, I press diagnose and repair and it says "there may be a problem with your domain name server configuration". Any help would be appreciated!
xplornetsuck
01-03-2010, 11:49 AM
Obtain IP automatically in WAN section. In the WAN section of the router, there is a DNS server section.
Put in 4.2.2.1 and 4.2.2.2 and if a third section there is open DNS servers address of 208.67.222.222

So as long as your LAN section has your local IP address as 192.168.1.10 and make a range for your computer IP's as, 192.168.1.40 to 192.168.1.70 .
Enable DHCP server as well. subnet mask of 255.255.255.0
New Denmark
01-03-2010, 01:27 PM
It doesn't seem to give me the option to change the DNS servers. When I load the page I see the option, but it finishes loading and takes the option away. The option should be under the subnet mask and above the "enable DNS relay" checkbox, but like I said it flashes for a second and disappears.
New Denmark
01-03-2010, 01:43 PM
Well I managed to change the DNS server information in the Windows TCP/IP settings, but it still won't connect. If it helps, my router is a D-link DIR-655.
xplornetsuck
01-03-2010, 03:20 PM
You shouldn't need to do anything on the computer, just the router.

With the router, you could reset it back to default, via a reset button that should be recessed on the router. Maybe it was setup for another service with different parameters? Change the IP range to something like 192.168.0.2 first before plugging into Hughesnet modem.
That way you can plug the router into the modem and it should pick up the IP from the modem. If not, you may have to turn off the modem and router and then start the modem and then start the router.
Then plug a wired computer into the router to start. Since you would have to configure security settings and passwords.


Here is another step by step install manual. If you want to avoid an install wizzard disc.
http://techgage.com/print/d-link_xtreme_n_dir-655_wireless_router
Without the ability to use the disk, we are going to go about this the good old fashioned way. To connect to the DIR-655, by default, you have to enter in 192.168.0.1 in your web browser’s search bar. When prompted for a username and password, the user is "admin" and there isn’t a password. This can all be changed in the setup but by default, there isn’t a password.
Change the 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.0.2 (or similar) to avoid conflict with Hughesnet modem.

Heres a pdf link to a manual.
static.tigerdirect.com/pdf/D-link-DIR-655-Manual.pdf
About 7MB


I've gotten so used to just plugging stuff in and them working(router, printer, scanner, etc. I tend to skip install discs, since some are a pain), that I have not found the need to do a bunch of different settings, other than DNS servers and security settings.
New Denmark
01-03-2010, 03:55 PM
I followed all those steps, then checked the status (of the routers network) and seen something I haven't seen before.

"the addressing of the Internet side learnt through DHCP conflicts with the addressing selected for the LAN side. Internet communications will be disabled until you have changed the LAN side addessing to resolve the problem."

I copied that word for word. It seems like we are headed in the right direction, what needs to be done now?
fasteddy2
01-03-2010, 04:29 PM
Log into the router and select the top "setup" tab. Then select the "Internet" tab on the left, and then "Manual Internet Connection Setup" at the bottom of the page. The next page that comes up will have Internet Connection Type, make sure yours is set for Dynamic IP (DHCP). NEXT CLICK "Save Settings". The router will want to reboot. Do so.

After the reboot log back into the router and select the setup tab again, then select
Network Settings on the left side. You will see the IP address of the router about mid page. I'm guessing that it's something like 192.168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1. Change it to 192.168.5.1, and save settings again. It will want a reboot. Do so.

Now the important part. Once it reboots, you will have to either restart your PC or open a command prompt and type "ipconfig /release" and enter, and then "ipconfig /renew" and enter. Then log back into the router and check the status tab.

Report your findings & best of luck...
New Denmark
01-03-2010, 10:21 PM
It seems to have worked! I don't know how, but it did, thanks!

Anyways, it seems that my service is extremely slow (20-30 KB/s). It could be because of the weather (snow storm-ish), but any tips?
fasteddy2
01-04-2010, 06:55 AM
Well speed is another issue all together. Since you are sharing 4 PCs on a single satellite connection, you should expect "dialup" speeds on each PC. If you have any torrents running, they will basically consume most of the available bandwidth.

To start: be sure only one PC is turned on, and then go to http://testmy.net and perform a test. Record the results in a spreadsheet. Do the same test during various times of the day and record the results. The next day turn on the rest of the PCs and do the tests again. I'm pretty sure you will be shocked at the results.

Now depending on who is doing what on each PC, you can assign a higher priority to say your PC than the rest of them. This will give your traffic priority over all the other PCs. BTW this is done through DIR655 router's advanced tab, and then QOS Engine, and then QOS rules...

Post results of your tests here as well (I'd like to see how slow the satellite link is).
Amber
01-04-2010, 12:12 PM
I can have as many as 4 devices going, but not all of them are generating internet traffic at the same time all the time. Usually all 4 aren't even on at the same time, but on occasion they might be. :) (That's an Xbox 360 console, 2 laptops, and a desktop PC.)

If a person knows how to view their firewall logs, you can see which devices are generating traffic before running a speed test.
Brad R
01-05-2010, 10:41 AM
If you have any torrents running, they will basically consume most of the available bandwidth.

Some of the bittorrent clients will let you limit the upload and download bandwidth. I use Azureus for this reason. I normally limit it to 10% of my plan bandwidth.
New Denmark
01-05-2010, 02:47 PM
Well it just seems the issue is with wireless devices. The two desktops that are using ethernet cable is fine, where as my desktop is using a high-end wireless adapter card I installed. My computer is very slow, I'm experiencing speeds I estimate to be around 10-15 KB/s, although when I go to speedtest.net, it says I have speeds around 250 kb/s, one test even showed 1,200 kb/s. It just seems odd that the wired devices are so fast, but the wireless ones are so slow.
Amber
01-05-2010, 04:12 PM
"Router logs"...I meant to say "router logs", not "firewall logs". :)
New Denmark
01-05-2010, 04:19 PM
Here is my router log, the most recent being at the top. Anything you see out of the ordinary that may contribute to the internet being snail-like?
xplornetsuck
01-05-2010, 05:24 PM
check in your router for the speed limiting of wireless devices.
wireless, advanced, TX rates (Mbps).

My router has the wireless restricted to 2Mbps as top speed.
New Denmark
01-06-2010, 12:06 AM
Apparently it's a problem with the router, a ton of people have problems with the DIR-655 router being slow, and after hours of browsing I was unable to come up with anything that worked at all.

I'll probably be switching to my other router *sigh*.
New Denmark
01-06-2010, 01:58 AM
Hmm. I may have jumped the gun. I discovered that my iPhone is working just fine on this router (goes 10x faster than the PC). It seems the card I put in installed a driver from Windows Update that may have caused the issue. My wireless card is a d-link DWA-552 Xtreme Gigabit wireless card. I need to change the driver, but the Dlink site isn't working for me. :(
fasteddy2
01-06-2010, 07:04 PM
Working with 2.4Ghz wireless can drive you crazy. So the iPhone works well, but at what distance from the router? If you use the iPhone by your wireless desktop, do you still get great results from the iPhone but poor from the desktop? Do you have any cordless phones using 2.4Ghz? Hope you realize that an active microwave oven will clobber your wireless connection. How far away from the router is the wireless desktop and how many walls (or floors) are there between them.

BTW I have been using a DIR655 for quite a while (with great success). I had a top end Linksys and it did not have the capabilities of the DIR655. Not that "I love Dlink" but their DIR625 and DIR655 have worked well for me because I can throttle my son's torrents (there by giving my traffic priority over his downloads).
xplornetsuck
01-06-2010, 07:23 PM
It seems the card I put in installed a driver from Windows Update that may have caused the issue. My wireless card is a d-link DWA-552 Xtreme Gigabit wireless card. I need to change the driver, but the Dlink site isn't working for me. :(

This should be the page? Click on drivers. Maybe the satellite lag is causing issues.

http://www.dlink.com/products/default.aspx?pid=DWA-552&tab=3
Click on United States as the country if clicking on Canada is the problem.
New Denmark
01-07-2010, 09:19 AM
Nope, at the time of that post it was down.

I did update the driver to no avail, so I brought it back and picked up a linksys card, which is working great! Everything is on the up-and-up now. :)
Wirestripper
01-16-2010, 05:50 AM
Sadly, I bought a D-Link Dir-615 rouuter for my network and I've been trying to get online with it for 5 days now. Maybe it's ust not compatible with the HN9000 modem. I have tried every setting in the book with it to no avail. So I went back to Best Buy and bought a Linksys WRT54GHN and after running the install, I unplugged the modem, plugged it back in and it works well. Finally! Hope this helps.
Amber
01-16-2010, 12:20 PM
FWIW, a local Xplornet dealer I was talking to a few days ago did mention that the D-link router is not compatible with Hughesnet systems.
tvman
01-18-2010, 04:54 PM
i have the DIR-601 wireless router. I only bought the router to have wireless capability on occasion. Now when i tried to get this damn thing running with my hughesnet 9000 modem i to had no luck and was ready to return it until i talked to my son in Calgary. He got me going by, get this, hooking the modem cable into a lan port and by hooking my computer into another lan port , no wan port hook up at all!! I have the router set at 192.168.0.254. So in reality it's working more like a hub i guess. It gives me an ip of .0.4 or what ever and i was also able to connect wirelessly with my laptop with no problems. Very strange but it does work.

Wednesday, May 04, 2011

state / trait

The state-trait anger test, the STAXI-2, provides a description of state and trait in real terms that we can apply (Borteyrou, et al. 2008).  I chose anger because it is often a component of personality disorder (Varghese, et al. 2010), especially Borderline PD.

Trait anger is measured as temperament and reaction (Varghese, et al. 2010).  State anger is measured as angry feelings, verbal expression, and physical expression--or violence.  Trait here can be described as a personality construct that consists of cognitive and motivational factors that describe how a client thinks and what he believes; his thinking (state) may be distorted because of problems in the underlying constructs (traits) (Owen, 2011).  As construct implies permanence, a therapist would want to find ways to alter or replace those permanent constructs (traits), that, in turn, would improve behaviors (state).  Reconstruction of traits to provide better states (behaviors) is a way to describe the cognitive strategy of CBT.

Pharmacology seeks to manage traits as vulnerabilities and states as symptoms (Bellino, 2008).  This implies that a defective trait needs to be fixed by making it less vulnerable with medicine. Topiramate is an anticonvulsant that can be used to manage anger in Borderline PD clients, and especially shows improvement for trait anger using the STAXI-2 (Varghese, et al. 2010), implying that it makes the clients less "vulnerable" to angry outbursts.

References

Bellino, S., Paradiso, E., & Bogetto, F. (2008). Efficacy and Tolerability of Pharmacotherapies for Borderline Personality Disorder. CNS Drugs, 22(8), 671-692. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Borteyrou, X., Bruchon-Schweitzer, M., & Spielberger, C. D. (2008).  The French adaptation of the STAXI-2, C.D. Spielberger's State-trait anger expression inventory. Encephale. 34(3) (pp 249-255).

Owen, J. M. (2011). Transdiagnostic cognitive processes in high trait anger. Clinical Psychology Review.31(2) (pp 193-202). 

Varghese, B. S., Rajeev, A., Norrish, M., & Bin Mohammed Al Khusaiby, S. (2010). Topiramate for anger control: A systematic review. Indian Journal of Pharmacology. 42(3) (pp. 135–141).




Part II

The 7 studies I looked at (on PubMed) focused on state-trait anger, and Borderline PD was a secondary focus.  They were all positive for use, though all recommended more study.

The most critical study was an overall view of pharmacology for Borderline PD (Lieb, et al., 2010).  It stated that medications should target Borderline PD symptoms, and the disorder as a whole.  This suggests an interesting (though hypothetical) state-trait question.  If a drug is effectively treating a symptom, such as angry outbursts, but is shown by testing to be treating a trait (vulnerability) as much as state (symptom), then is the trait is only a single component of the disorder?

(I say "hypothetical" because only the study I cited, Varghese, et al. (2010), specifically offered trait data, though 6 of the 7 did trait-state anger testing.)

Returning to the conceptual idea of a trait as a distorted construct (Owen, 2011) that causes irrational talk and actions, my significant thoughts while writing this were about using Dialectal Behavioral Therapy (DBT), with pharmacology only as a support.  DBT focuses on a near-mechanical cognitive restructuring of the client's destructive psychological constructs (trait) that dominate his actions (state) (Oldham, Skodol, & Bender, 2009).  Assertiveness is taught as a skill to challenge the ill-logic of the defective constructs so as to remain "on track" to recovery (p. 242).  Interestingly, this thought process is categorized in terms of "interpersonal effectiveness" (p. 242).  Intrapersonal might be more descriptive of the client's self-approach to trait change.

References

Lieb, K., Völlm, B., Rücker, G., Timmer, A., & Stoffers, J. M. (2010). Pharmacotherapy for borderline personality disorder: Cochrane systematic review of randomised trials.British Journal of Psychiatry. 196(1) (pp. 4-12).

Oldham, J., Skodol, A., & Bender, D. (2009). Essentials of Personality Disorders. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.

Varghese, B. S., Rajeev, A., Norrish, M., & Bin Mohammed Al Khusaiby, S. (2010). Topiramate for anger control: A systematic review. Indian Journal of Pharmacology. 42(3) (pp. 135–141).

Thursday, February 10, 2011

Jung's bent universe

Jungian personality types
Personality traits are described in Jung's personality code as letters are biopolar in that they represent opposing traits along a linear measure.  They measure the distance along a pole an individual tends to that trait, and away from the opposing trait.  Jung described introversion and extraversion as the key polar traits and refered to them as attitudes; they comprise the first letter of the code.  The next two letters in the code measure sensing versus intuition, and feeling versus thinking; Jung referred to them as functions.  The final pole, perceiving versus judging, comes from the Myers-Briggs typographic model, and is also a function.

Poles
For Jung, an attitude "plays the principal role in an individual's adaptation or orientation to life" (1921, para. 1).  The two factors for this pole, extraversion and introversion, describe how a person draws mental energy.  The extravert draws mental energy from the surrounding environment, or from a crowd..  The introvert draws mental energy internally from the ideas that develop within his mind.  The mental energy, or "psychic energy," is called libido in Jung's model.  An individual's approach to life, or attitude, is determined by his prefered way to obtain libido; either externally from the surrounding environment, or interally from personal thoughts (Jung, 1976).



Libido: Pyschic nutrition
Jung describes the need for libido as a driving force, or what BF Skinner might think of as a hunger; libido is effectively nutrition for the mind.  Jung describes the extravert as absorbing llibido from the surrounding environment by attaching to it as an "object."  To Jung, the extravert is, hence, objective, as the psychic energy is based on surrounding reality.  The introvert, conversely, develops this nutrition within his mind from the "subject" of his thoughts; the introvert is subjective to Jung, and his psychic metabolism (to extend the nutrition analogy) is synthesis.

Bi-poles as a "bent universe"
Jung is emphatic that mental health hinges on a person's adaptability along the poles of his bipolar model.  Thinking problems may result for extraverts when they are overwhelmed by the information that they pull in, whereas introverts may attempt to "coerce facts" to resemble a preconceived image that they have created (Jung, 1921, para. 87).  When individuals tend to extremes along either pole, and neglect the qualities of the other end of the pole, they will very likely compensate for the trait of the pole they have neglected (Jung, 1976, p. 3) and move towards the counter-pole (p. 291).  His three pole model can be thought of as a "bent universe" because those at polar extremes will ultimately compensate in some way.  In his "bent universe," the extreme extrovert cannot help but return to the subject of his thoughts, or his "soul" (p. 293).  In the opposite polar direction, the introvert cannot help but crash into reality, or the "object" that defines surrounding reality.  If the extravert is intent on his attachment to the object (as the participant self-reported that he has experienced at times), then he creates a mythology that serves as a substitute for introverted thought, or the subject.  However, if he is not careful, the compensating restoration of the "soul" may ultimately destroy the material benefits that extroversion may have provided (p. 340).  In a similar sense, the extreme introvert creates a facsimile of reality that Jung describes as a "dream" (p. 169).

Jung's two other bipolar measures describe how an individual functions with respect to his role. They are "function-types" (1976, p. 330), and describe how an individual collects information and makes decisions based on how he "attends.".  Information can be collected through the normal senses, which is sensing, or through a "sixth sense" (J. Dyce, personal communication, n.d.) of intuition.  Intuition is how the unconscious perceives.  Decisions can be made logically and in a detached way, or in a personal value-oriented way, creating the thinking/feeling bipole.

The fourth pole from the Myers-Briggs model adds a third functional dimension that describes prefered lifestyle in terms of either judgement, which is rigidly well-ordered and highly-organized, or perception, which is flexible as it allows for spontaneity, providing an ability to shift between tasks.

Plato and Aristotle: Jung's approach to subjective- and objectiveness
To help illustrate the fundamental importance of the introvert/extravert pole, and to show that Jung's theory was not entirely his own invention, but was based on others' supporting ideas, including the classics, Jung inserted a passage by Heine at the very beginning of the book describing Plato in introverted terms, and Aristotle in extraverted terms.  Plato, in Heine's passage, is mystical, and hence subjective in Jung's model; and Aristotle is orderly and practical (presumably with respect to information organization).  Aristotle is openly attached to the "object" of his surrounding environment, and hence an extravert and objective.  This assessment contradicts the common perception of both Plato and Aristotle being objective, but in different ways.  Plato's Forms created a basis for orderly science, and Aristotle's disciplined observational approach contributed to the scientific method.  Both of them are further perceived as highly objective because of their resistance to sentimentality.  The Similarminds questionaire makes a similar distinction with questions that define a rational/sentimental bipole ("Personality Test," n.d.).  Jung further contradicts the common perception of Plato as objective by attaching the concept of "empathy," and hence sentimentality, to objectivity (p. 48), and by showing that empathy's antithesis, abstraction, is used by the introvert to synthesize a version of the world within his mind--as he may be afraid of the real world (p. 505).  As Jung's ideas are the basis for the instrument of this assessment, this conclusion by Jung underscores the necessity to assess the individual in the context of his personality and experiences, and not in the context of contemporary society with its many preconceptions. 

Sense/intuition and thinking/feeling
Jung's two functional bipoles, sense/intuition and thinking/feeling, also obey the rules of his "bent universe" that forces compensation at the extremes.  Intuition can be thought of as an added, or sixth sense.  This implies that unintuitive individuals who are sense-oriented rely on superficial cues from the surrounding environment, and hence may not be able to interpret the meanings of surrounding phenomena, and therefore are distanced, and possibly afraid (p. 505).  "Sense," therefore, might be counter-intuitively interpreted as an introverted pole and "intuition" an extroverted, and also empathic, pole.  Jung self-debates the extra- and introverted nature of the sensing/intuition bipole, but agrees that intuition is important, along with empathy, for understanding others (p. 473).  Thinking and feeling are even easier to explain; thinking is the domain of the introvert.  Jung describes it as thinking of subjects, and, as thinking is the polar opposite to feeling, the thinking/feeling bipole further attaches Plato to subjectivity.

In Psychological Types, Jung describes a dichotomous bipolar model of opposing traits that not only explains personality phenomena along the established poles used by the Myers-Briggs, but introduces many related descriptors that can create a flexible matrix that is applicable to diverse therapeutic scenarios (Jung, 1976).
  Jung built his theory by critically examining other theories being developed during the early 20th Century, and further supports it with classical anecdotes.  Jung's writing is self-critical in a way that creates possibilities for alternate analyses, which allowed the participant to modify his interpretation of the intuitive/sensing bipole to improve his self-assessment.  Psychological Types gives advanced insights into the relationships between many psychological concepts.  The most important of these are empathy, abstraction, and conceptualization (Jung, 1976, p 48), as he reported seeing these concepts being implemented to define emotional intelligence.

References

Jung, C. (1921). Psychological types. Retrieved November 23, 2010, from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm

Jung, C., (1976). Psychological Types. Princeton: Princeton University Press


Vacha-Haase, T., & Thompson, B. (2002). Alternative ways of measuring counselees' Jungian psychological-type preferences. Journal of Counseling & Development, 80(2), 173. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.


Was CG Jung a racist?

I felt encouraged to absorb more of Jung's ideas when I found a possible relationship between his archetypes and the evolution of language and the "deeper" meanings of words.

I found much about mythology in his writing (in fact I found it overwhelming), but attempted to stay on-topic with respect to his typology.  Nonetheless, I found his bipole approach (which was not his alone) to be so dimensional as to be "cosmic."

I found two of his three measures to be simple enough; it was the "sensing/intuitive" measure that took more effort to grasp.  He shows in different places how this axis can be either intro- or extraverted.   I found a racist component of his thinking that I feel would be different if he lived today, and would alter his "cosmos."


Jung makes statements in Psychological Types (1976) linking both intuition and extraversion to the "primitive" person in a negative way that was influenced by his time and culture.  They would have opposite meaning if he lived to day, as the third quote seems highly-racist as it compares natives to monkeys, and presumably would be different:

  • "unconscious demands of the extravert have an essentially primitive, infantile, egocentric character" (p. 571),
  • "intuition is characteristic of the infantile and primitive psychology" (p. 454), and
  • "a bush-man had a little boy whom he loved with the tender monkey-love of primitives" (p. 227).

In congruence with his time, he viewed natives seemingly as a lower species.  If this perception were to be altered throughout his writing, as it would probably be if he lived today, then the sensing ability of the "primitive" would become revised as the intuitive knowledge of the shaman.

I think this would alter the sensing/intuition bipole, and possibly the typology's use in instruments today.  As is, I believe that he was very much "on the fence" with respect to this and other related concepts such as empathy, abstraction, and conceptualization.  Perhaps he was forming a better view of these concepts unconsciously while he was expressing views of his time that included some racism.  I just don't see him as a racist, as racists, in my experience, tend be wholly ignorant and, in at least one case, decidedly bipolar (which mean in the other sense).



Wednesday, February 02, 2011

Empathy model outline

A "clean room" approach to emotional communication


This introduction:
It is difficult to write about psychology because the traditional theories (which are still philosophy-based, using 2500 year old material) still confound observed phenomena, often obviously, such as in the cases of Freud and Watson. I wrote this synopsis of my "clean room" implementation of the empathy model primarily to focus and refresh the learning.  My learning, counseling psychology (masters degree), is being shared on the Wikiversity.


Resource model

  • Emotional communication works to create a communication matrix that allows for the collaboration and mutual support that is found in higher organisms.
  • Responsibility grows from emotional connections within the environment of family and community in humanity and with many animal groups.
  • Those with dysfunctional emotional communication systems, who are unable to collaborate to create resources, are forced to group to use predatory strategies.  They often create predatory cooperation group systems that rely on digital communication (Humbolt squid).  This is organismic fate, which is, in nature, a mistake in the genetic code in higher animals, and especially in humans.  Capital structure, the dominant component of modern human society, leverages emotional communication dysfunction to develop predatory strategies to obtain resources violently such as through theft and through war.

Evolutionary empathy
  • The emotion and emotional communication are ancient and below (or behind) the neocortex (mouse, cortex, PAG)
  • Higher empathy appears to be in brain networks, such as in the pyramid cells of the neocortex, and  leads in two directions:
  1. Compassion for others outside of the immediate family to the community and on to distant people--"intangible" relationships
  2. Collaboration becomes so sophisticated combining analytic and emotionally communicative facilities to combine reason and affection into a technical responsibility-based desired ability to create resources
  • In the opposite direction, the unempathic forces take this product, remove the community of knowledge and, in the process, natural responsibility so as to be able to direct  technology toward a predatory purpose: to take other's resources.  In recent centuries this has been in factories and mechanized warfare, and, more recently, to reduce productive society to a pure consumption mode.

Natural organisms are the successful result of evolution; organisms that are not finely-tuned in the ways produced by evolution to meet needs required by the environment are genetically defective and hence dysfunctional.  In higher organisms, emotional communication is the most important evolutionary refinement, and, in nature, emotional communication dysfunctions result in social isolation, and hence far fewer opportunities to reproduce.  This allows natural organisms to keep moving forward in evolution, and keeps social cohesion strong.  In contrast to nature, modern human society does not isolate the emotionally dysfunctional, and, in many cases, attempts to force them to become successful, which tends to place those with emotional communication defectives in control positions--with consistently bad and sometimes horrific results.  Further, they are often encouraged to reproduce for reasons of spirituality or human capital, which assures that future generations will be affected.

The model was initially based on empathy basics such elephant family observations and the monkey colonies of Cayo Santiago where members who unable to interact collaboratively, effectively forcing them to steal to survive, are marginalized. 

Predatory relationships
  • Predatory-normal: victimize through a relationship such as an abusive marriage.
  • Predatory-predatory: find normally empathic people to exploit

Someone may enter into a predatory-normal relationship, have children, and then find and marry a fellow-predator, a better "match," who can be a partner in an exploitative business.  Since predator-predator relationships lack the empathy that defines normal relationships, they are dependent on a resource stream that can very likely be defined in terms of capital.  Their relationships with their children will fall into the same patterns. 

The normal, or victim, in the relationship will often attempt to "fix" the predatory partner with the misconception that the predator has within the components necessary for normalcy, and will attempt to re-write the predators thinking, especially since a mutual relationship is more logical, and hence beneficial.  This is encouraged by capital structure, and especially by religion, which often views all as having a "holy" spirit or soul.  For capital, the goal is the development of valued human assets, or resources.  The process, which can be thought of as mapping, will often work temporarily, but the predator's basic mode will always return, forcing the normal partner to try again.  In effect, the normal partner "paints a pretty picture" of the relationship, a process which, in fact, is a cognitive disorder.

Children will attempt to reconstruct these defective relationships in future relations such as marriage if the consciousness has been mapped by a predatory parent.  With time, they see the ill-logic and marry appropriately.

Not surprisingly, as we know that societal structures have been refined from family structure, modern civilization often fits this pattern especially as we find it in Plato's Republic.

Mediated glandular responses
  • Creating benefits through good work, especially through collaboration, produces the benefits of life, and with them good feelings that are the result of positive glandular responses to that beneficial work.
  • Bad results produce bad responses that are negative glandular responses

The emotional benefit from the effort of developing physical benefits, especially through collaboration, gives people (and perhaps most higher organisms) a good feeling that is provided by the glandular systems of the brain in parallel to the physical benefits.  People who are consistently unable to obtain the benefits of life (possibly because they are not connected to the normal community process of creating benefits such as occurs in the case of an emotional communication dysfunction), will often attempt to use some means to create the same good feeling that accompanies natural benefits.  They attempt to mediate a response synthetically to obtain the same positive glandular response that beneficial activity provides.  Gambling is an example, as a gambler pays a lot for the opportunity to be able to feel the benefits of winning, despite having to lose many times to do so.  "Hard" drug users short-circuit the entire benefit-creation process by producing the glandular response directly, such as with a chemical injection.  In some cases they may take this mediated path this because their brains cannot produce positive glandular responses through any other means, such as through beneficial success. 

Poverty often precludes the ability to succeed, and hence the ability to naturally "feel good" as a benefit of collaborative success.  This, logically, would make it a cause for mediated and short-curciuted attempts to create positive glandular responses.  Poverty should then result in high levels of gambling and "hard" drug use.

Emotional VS character (digital) communication
  • Conceptual versus sequential
  • White matter versus purely executive function

The necessity, or urgency, of predator-victim model pushes the most important component aside, which is the underlying difference between the two.  Normalcy, or empathy, is the goal of evolution, which all you can find in nature.  Normalcy has slipped in humanity to possibly 80% with 20% only able to function in an exploitative mode.  Why?  In our time, cocaine, or powered narcissism, is probably the most to blame.  Throughout history humanity has been slipping away from natural appreciation, which is highly complex, to calculating thought, which is sequential.  Sequential roughly relates to linear thought, which is how sequential-only thinkers think of their thought, but it is not linear.  It is prone to error causing dead stops in logic, but continues in the crooked path that normal people are expected to accept--or else.

Sequential thought could be considered executive function, and complex thought all the other parts of the brain usually detected as white matter.  White matter is insulating fat on neurons that allows neural electrical activity to accelerate, so complex thought could be said to require a pick-up in processing speed to achieve the "critical mass" necessary for complexities such as higher emotions.  This is described as empathy and is usually attributed to the specialized spindle and mirror neurons, but many, if not most, animals have empathy without these neurons and interrelate without them, such mice and our pets do.  Researchers find it in the more ancient parts of the brain, and we find sequential communication in the very ancient Humbolt Squid with its humboldt squid chromatophores.  Those without the ability to reach neural "critical mass" are unable to conceive of what it is and attempt to thought purely in terms of sequential, usually calculating thought.  The vast healthy majority (80-90%) that is able to reach "critical mass" tends to take it for granted.

Mechanical and synaptic descriptions: Lewin and Boyton 
  • The activity is in the spaces between us, much like Lewin attempts to describe using physics, but for corporate organizational psych, a behaviorist area.
  • Extensions of that into person to person connections in psychoanalysis, or transference: Boyton

Constructivism
  • The community of knowledge is where home is
  • Loss of the natural and historical community of knowledge leads to moral collapse and mental illness

The economic phenomena of "churning" forces constant job-change, and in many cases, constant migration, guaranteeing the destruction of the established communities of knowledge that define human society and culture.  The churning effect results in the creation, or "development," of synthetic communities that are linked to non-productive mall-type commercial centers that attempt to imitate culture as a lure for resources for consumption.  Missing entirely is the basis of human collaboration, and hence responsibility and morality.  What is substituted for morality is synthetic: the rule of law, which, of course, does nothing to support mental health.  As this type of capital construct invariably lacks a productive component and functions purely on consumption, it has to locate remote resources to exploit to prevent economic collapse.

Counter-empathy
Un-empathy, the lack of emotional communication abilities, or emotional communication dysfunction (ECD) which is a noun and static.
Anti-empathy, action based on this dysfunction, which is the obtaining of resources by taking instead of by contributing collaboratively. 

The model tends to define anti-empathic phenomena in evolutionary terms, which would point to DNA.  Sociology and psychology more more demanding; the negative results of anti-empathy would have to be described in social or mental context.  Following the resources component of the model, it is likely that aggressiveness would result from a perception that resources may not be available, or that there is some threat, probably as a result of resource unavailability.  Since most organisms are healthy, including humans, this perception will likely be a misconception; in other words, paranoia.  Within the context of the Internet, where the model is being developed, there have been examples (that were easily documented) of paranoia being used to actually generate small examples of humanity's two big problems: bias and hate.

Society moves from a mutually supportive community to an un-empathic capital environment where controllers exclude normally collaborative people (Lewis Mumford's democratic technic) who created the benefits society into desperation.  Their contributions, or innovations, are transferred to the unempathic, Plato's upper layers, and the process is imitated with exponentially declining success usually protected with misinformation, preserved with exclusion strategies such as the high stakes testing of human capital systems (Confucian/Mandarin testing), and if not that, violence.

Layered Model
This is a gift from recent information technology; the Internet protocol stack model that describes, in abstraction, simultaneous yet different events, and sometimes seemingly unrelated events strike on each levels necessary for Internet communication.  Each has its own nature and purpose, yet each layer operates as a component of every action. Comparison of the "IP stack" with Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.

As a teacher in an autistic school, I learned to think of external human functions as abilities, and the underlying mechanisms as facilities that enable these functions, or give people abilities.  Most obviously missing in the severely autistic is speech; Chomsky describes speech ability as the output of underlying functionality that is somehow independent within the mind (and brain). 

The layered approach to digital Internet communication can be use to show how each of the interrelating components of each mental action can be abstracted into layers, starting from the very lowest neural activity and moving upwards to the point that the mental activity is communicated. , from the neural layers (which are analogous to circuits in many ways), up through the emotional layers, out to the surrounding environment (where emotional actions influence others), and ultimately upward to influence to the nature of human society.  From there a layered model can be used to show how actions affect the surrounding environment and ultimately society.  Healthy thoughts initiate with the actions of well-functioning neurons, and ultimately positively influence the surrounding environment. Likewise, badly-formed thoughts arising from poorly-functioning neurology will have unhealthy effects on the surrounding environment.  The model can abstract the effects of defective neurology in important places to show how they can, and often do, have exceptionally bad results for the World.

They layered, or stack, approach quickly brings the model to the sociological level.  Large organizations typically lack empathy as organizational control requires that executives may have to exploit people for the resources necessary to keep very large structures growing to offset the inefficiency caused by their overbearing managerial superstructures.  Within large, and sometimes small organizations, managers are required to have a cold approach to others as they may have to fire them.  In general, the empathy of an organization is proportional to the distance from people of its supporting foundation to the control center at the top, but small organizations are in no way immune.  Empathy quickly disappears within the first few layers of a controlling superstructure, or capital structure.  This was described in Michael Moore's Roger and Me.

Facilities (neural functional systems) produce abilities (neural constructs) that facilitate (predispose) unique actions to allow a person to produce a self (self-actualization).  The ability to speak leverages emotional communication, but does not define it.  The use of speech for emotional communication lies above the emotional constructs that utilize it for emotional communication, so, in a sense, the ability to speak combines both underlying speech facilities and expressive abilities.  The constructs that utilize speech can use other communication abilities, or channels, such as eye contact and touch.

Missing mental facilities result in mental disabilities, but, in the empathic model, mental disabilities are only limitations if they are so deep that they actually prevent the development of empathic constructs, and hence prevent emotional communication within the social environment.  A person may be disabled in significant ways, including communication abilities such as speech, but if they can develop and reflect emotion communication constructs, that is, to communicate empathically, they can always rely on the community support that comes from the responsibility of empathic people.

As an example, Down's syndrome victims have nothing wrong with them from the perspective of the model because they typically have an ability, and often a strong desire, to connect emotionally.  What we see as a problem is that they are missing an executive function facility that helps us moderate friendliness and use caution specifically to assure that we are not victimized by organisms that have no empathy: in humanity, the anti-empathic.

However, there is a problem with empathy.  Empathic people, through higher empathy, often attempt to provide support to the emphatically dysfunctional to empower them, usually as an extension of religion or spirituality combined with concepts of human capital.  As a result, people who outwardly appear normal, may in fact be disabled in terms of emotional communication, and despite this will be encouraged, or even forced, to attempt to succeed beyond the scope of their natural abilities.  The misconception is that people with empathic defects can be empowered to be responsible in the sense that they can be made to contribute to the capital structure.  As they cannot fully function at expected levels, they become angry when they are pushed beyond their natural abilities, and even if they have a degree of natural empathy, once they are empowered beyond their capabilities, they effectively become cruel.

Implementation
The empathy model is fairly easy to implement.  As a resource model, problems, in the most general form, result from someone, or a cooperative group, attempting to obtain resources non-collaboratively as a predator; someone else is being victimized.  This can be anywhere, including the family, as family members are sometimes thought of, by people lacking empathy, as assets.  FGM in ancient African nations is an example. 

Extending this idea of a person as a family asset is human capital; capital structures see humans if it can profit from them, and liabilities if it cannot.  Most institutions are structured around this, and as such, are looking to benefit people so that they can "contribute" to the national (and now global) capital structure's growth.  Often those who cannot succeed in similar school-type didactic structures, are pushed so hard that it is the "desire" of the capital structure for their success that is the cause of their problems; and hence the saying "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

If it is difficult to find an actual resource benefit for abuse, then the next step is to look for a mediated "feeling" of benefit, or glandular response; many may be abusive because abuse has benefited them in the past, given them the good feeling of success, and they reproduce the feeling by repeating the action; this is a sadistic mediated glandular response.

The paranoia component has been addressed for several millennia; forgiveness is necessary to prevent the paranoia resulting from past transgressions, or "trespasses" as Christians say, from continuing a cycle of paranoia.

In all cases, whether predatory, victimized, or simply normally happy, happiness is dependent on a productive position that is within the scope of the person.

Friday, January 07, 2011

Contemporary-versity

Singly the most important thing is freedom of speech, and this is what distinguishes the Wikiversity (WV) from the Wikipedia (WP).  In the WV it is encased in the concept of original research, or OR.  Obviously I am referring to cold fusion (CF), but I am also talking about my research on the WP that has given real insight into the underlying mechanisms of humanity's big problem of hate.  (It seems reasonable to assume that energy-hungry humanity would have implemented it decades ago!)

Having said that, the successful anti-free speech strategy has been to utilize free speech itself as the vehicle for limiting it; this strategy is not only universal, it is so successful that it has consistently installed the non-productive in positions of control over normal productive populations to operate them un-empathically as a single organic mass in every single case--even in revolution!  (In keeping with free speech, it is necessary at this point to overtly state that free speech does not include the right to censorship.  This has to be stated in this way because censors are unable to view omnidirectionally; they are defective in this way, and, as a result, are pathologically biased and, hence, undesirable here--or anywhere else.  If there is information removal, it has to be done by consensus; three un-consensual removals lead to a lifetime ban, with previous bad-will being the enforcer.)

A concrete example
I cannot go forward without a concrete relevant example; I am forced to be critical to be logical.  Slogging through the mess of CF, I came across what I have recently identified as the reactionary rebellion within the open forum to dominate the open form, (Mumford's Democratic Technic), for the benefit of elite (Mumford's Authoritarian Technic) or the oligarchy to everyone else: Several of the cold fusion supporters compare themselves to Socrates.  Socrates is inseparable from Plato, and Aristotle spills the beans by taking credit for others' work, especially Hippocrates, and then convinces Alexander that non-Greeks are objects like "plants to be cut down."  It is impossible to be a humanist and a genocidal racist simultaneously as each requires radically different neural constructs; Aristotle was faking; he was as mentally isolated as Plato was. While their self-comparisons with Socrates and the Platonics may seem narcissistic, it is far more than that, it is clever.  By playing the outsider or underdog, they can follow the path of those who established Western Civilization; he is attempting to take the well-trodden revolutionary path to domination.  It does not matter if he, himself, believes in CF; his absurdity is his power; if he is challenged he will behave absurdly, precisely as Ayn Rand's characters do in the Fountainhead: her rebel oligarchs who seek to crush the unfeeling, corrupt mass of humanity.

That this strategy should actually work comes as a surprise to the average person as it is so counter-intuitive.  Key to understanding this strategy is perceiving of it is a picture within a picture.  Athens used a "naval tax" (based on its successful naval defense of Greece) to build the Parthenon, its democratic forum.  It implemented (Mumford's) diffuse tribute collection system that Rome would later use to build its Empire.  In other words, to build its democracy, Athens had to rip-off Sparta using tribute collection, or taxes, giving the Socratic-Platonic school (or the Academy from which all education descends) the rationale for treachery against the democracy of Athens (that unruly mass!) to, quite significantly and ultimately, create our Western oligarchy on behalf of the Spartan aristocracy.  The Confucian structure of Asia must be the same; we specifically know from the Vietnamese revolutions that the exam-filtered Mandarins viewed the normal, productive population as a nameless organic mass to be exploited; normal minds don't think this way, but will have to soon, as time is running out for humanity.

Restoration of humanity
Because Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle gave us such simple structures, each of us intuitively knows what to dismantle.  We also know that we as normal people can provide for ourselves all the basics (good-tasting food, attractive clothes, comfortable dwellings, and stimulating entertainment) except one: medicine (or perhaps, Medicine).  Socrates' oligarchy has successfully created a monopoly from this, the very thing we need for life, even though the majority of medicines come from the shamans of the forests.  Another related important monopoly is Education, which is of course, closely related to Medicine as it controls not only the factual information, but, more importantly, the certification system.

To be able to move past the misnamed "modern" but wholly ancient system, to our also misnamed "post-modern" contemporary system, we have half of what we need: an Education system!  From this we can build a Medicine system specifically targeted at the oligarch's core medical monopoly.  Also keeping the basics of food, shelter, clothing, and entertainment moving forward in the fashionable post-modern mode of "DIY."

To succeed we have to assure that we do not fall into Socrate's or Rand's "picture within a picture."  We need to assure that our rebellion is not an oligarchy in the making bringing us full circle back into the present state of disaster.  The solution therefore is not retaliation for all the evils of oligarchy and aristocracy (collectively the elite), but, as we showed this summer at the Rainbow Gathering, to find level-appropriate highly-productive niches for all--especially the mentally ill.  This applies especially for the overly intelligent (executive functioning) obsessively-compulsively driven (with broken brain networks), so that they don't attempt to succeed where they cannot by grabbing power because they cannot collaborate and hence be normally productive. 

Therapy
This theraputic solution has a problem; because available production positions are diminishing as a result of oligarchic expansion, there are fewer and fewer available productive niches for the defective oligarchs.  Such positions were increasing through the 1950s and 60s, but the growth of the elite and guardian structures has shrunk the productive layer until finally it was shipped out of the country.  We though we had a solution by implementing (this) information technology; but the oligarchy cleverly reversed this effort to create productive positions in the US, the "new economy," by handing information technology over to an especially hateful uber cast on the opposite side of the planet--possibly deliberately to halt this path to productivity for the defective oligarchs.  They, the oligarchs, understand their minds far better than we, the mass of normal people, ever will; they will always be a step ahead of our normal attempts at therapy, as it is their disease that we seek to cure, and especially because we are forced to practice within their maze-like structure.

What we have to understand is that people don't deliberately do bad things, they lack the ability to function at the top levels that wholly natural organisms do.  They synthesize as Plato did rather than organize as normal people do.  Evolution shows us that each organism operates at its full capacity; any mutations will result in an inability to pass along mutant genes, and also probably death.  We in society can prevent these unfortunate deaths, typically from starvation, but we tend to allow the mutations to reproduce, creating a humanity that may be as much as 20 or 30 percent defective, especially in terms of emotional communication and brain networks.  This kindness has to continue and increase, but the mutant reproduction must stop.  As Jon Scot showed us, "evil" is not so much evil as an absence of "good."  People can only function within the scope of their abilities; the high-intelligent whose executive are cut off from their lower ancient empathic constructs because of damaged neural pathways really need to live within their emotionally limited scope, as otherwise they will hurt the normally functioning majority.

In other words, the therapeutic strategy is that nobody gets hurt.  But finding productive niches for the compulsively-driven will prove problematic as production in the West has been halted and handed over to ill-prepared agrarians in Asia (who don't as of yet understand the concepts of critical inquiry into the morality of production) by the compulsively-driven.  This creates a possibly insurmountable problem that reminds me of violent revolution: struggle for the means of production.  I cannot imagine a solution that is non-violent as every attempt at non-violence in the global arena has met with violence from the globalist guardians through swat teams, billy clubs, arrests, and tear gas; and reverse violence from the rear by so-called anarchists who are merely terrorist egotists, and in my experience, fascistic themselves.