Discussions

Can we think our way out of extinction?

Posted Jan. 6, 2011 by IONS Staff in Big Questions

commented on Dec. 23, 2013
by mrmathew1963

Quote

126

Easter Island

Can we think our way out of extinction?

In this month’s online edition of Noetic Now, we feature an excerpt from a new book that makes a strong case that the human intellect has not evolved at the same pace as the complexity of the challenges it now faces – to our collective peril. As sociobiologist-turned-change agent Rebecca Costa writes, “To finally answer the question [of] why human beings compulsively follow the same pattern of collapse again and again and again, we must come to terms with how we are wired to behave, irrespective of nationality, race, intelligence, wealth, or political convenience.” Fortunately, she also asserts that “signs of a cognitive threshold begin appearing long before collapse, so there is ample time to act.” Costa’s solution is to focus on cultivating the power of insight, using such tools as working in small groups, emphasizing brain fitness, training for innovation, elevating the role of play, “collaborating with complexity,” and practicing present-moment mindfulness. These will help, but will they be enough? Do we have the capacity to cross this threshold and avoid the darker scenarios that many are predicting if fundamental changes don’t happen soon? What do you think? 

  • Check out IONS’ new teleseminar series, "Shifting Paradigms," which will focus on barriers to paradigm shift, how to accelerate positive change, and how the transformational process can occur on a global scale.
     
  • Read The 2008 Shift Report: Changing the Story of Our Future, which explores the impacts of our belief systems and worldviews on individual and social well-being.

Please join this discussion by sharing your response to this question in the comment space below.


  • 126 Comments  
  • mrmathew1963 Dec 23, 2013

    RE:"I said I take it as a compliment because I do. I really, really do."

    Yes I know that is the problem & an obvious psychological problem within yourself you are unable to see obviously.

    I don't think IONS should have let this go this far but there might be a reason why they have!!

  • NoetPoet Dec 23, 2013

    No, you are simply unable to understand what I am saying. I said I take it as a compliment because I do. I really, really do. No I didn't read it in a book, stop projecting your behavioural tendencies on to me.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 23, 2013

    Trust me you’re the one not getting it, I have spoken recently to two particular people who are obviously a lot more intellectual than you or I & they can’t believe you can’t get it.

    You demand scientific proof from others but in caveman days scientific proof wasn't available so with your deductive reasoning the fire couldn't exist without scientific proof. I'm sorry but I am unable to explain it any simpler.

    If one is shown to be a criminal are they or are they not titled as such? You have shown you are a deceiver quite blatantly so the cap fits does it not?

    RE:” Coming from you, I take that as a compliment!”

    Could you respond with something more original, it was obvious what the came back was going to be which shows me you can’t think for yourself. You didn’t memorise this from a book as well did you??

  • NoetPoet Dec 23, 2013

    Now wasn't that an intelligent response!

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 23, 2013

    G'day Deception (NoetPoet)

    Yet another deceptive move by you to attain control, good luck!! I think it's obvious to me now your a troll!!

  • NoetPoet Dec 23, 2013

    With your reasoning the universe can't exist because there is no sound proof of how it was created so there is no sound proof according to your reasoning the universe could exist like the caveman fire. I had a funny feeling you weren't getting where I was coming from.

    Simply wrong! How do you even arrive at such a bizarre conclusion? Please spell out your reasoning process here, because I’m sure it will be morbidly fascinating. Again I ask: what makes you think the universe even WAS created?
    I’m doubtful that even YOU know where you’re coming from.

    “You do demand scientific proof from others for their theories & assumptions but if it's a scientific theory which is also just a theory not fact that's OK with you, you will accept this. Double standards again. “

    I will accept scientific theories because there is a wealth of experimental and real-world evidence (especially technology) for them, and it only takes you a matter of minutes to find such evidence. The evidence for pseudoscientific and New Age theories on the other hand is usually scant and dubious, and it’s not unusual for them to not even have internal logical consistency!

    “Sorry but you have lost all credibility with me.”

    Coming from you, I take that as a compliment!

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 22, 2013

    G'day NoetPeoT

    RE:"That’s not what I’m saying at all. What I’m saying is that claims require evidence to back them up. At any rate, there is literally a whole universe worth of evidence that the universe exists, so I don’t know what you’re going on about there."

    With your reasoning the universe can't exist because there is no sound proof of how it was created so there is no sound proof according to your reasoning the universe could exist like the caveman fire. I had a funny feeling you weren't getting where I was coming from.

    You do demand scientific proof from others for their theories & assumptions but if it's a scientific theory which is also just a theory not fact that's OK with you, you will accept this. Double standards again.

    Sorry but you have lost all credibility with me.

  • NoetPoet Dec 22, 2013

    “What is more delusional than saying nothing can exist unless scientifically proven because that is what you have demanded from others who reason differently. So nothing can exist unless it can be proven scientifically, the universe obviously doesn't exist then!! “

    That’s not what I’m saying at all. What I’m saying is that claims require evidence to back them up. At any rate, there is literally a whole universe worth of evidence that the universe exists, so I don’t know what you’re going on about there.

    “Bible bashers that's all we need is more bible bashers bashing their own form of bible, deductive delusional reasoning which I have proven a number of times is flawed. “

    Oh you’ve proven that “deductive delusional reasoning” is flawed have you? Well please by all means restate your proof for everyone’s benefit.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 22, 2013

    G'day NoetPoet

    What is more delusional than saying nothing can exist unless scientifically proven because that is what you have demanded from others who reason differently. So nothing can exist unless it can be proven scientifically, the universe obviously doesn't exist then!!

    Bible bashers that's all we need is more bible bashers bashing their own form of bible, deductive delusional reasoning which I have proven a number of times is flawed.

  • NoetPoet Dec 22, 2013

    If we refuse to think beyond our own delusional fantasies and what we want to believe, if we can’t or won’t make evidence-based decisions, then we really are in danger of extinction.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 22, 2013

    If we can't think our way out of bashing our own personal ideological reasoning processes & trying to force this onto others we have no hope in thinking our way out of extinction. In the last few weeks it has been shown to me that certain people who can only obviously reason deductively are just as bad if not worse than bible bashers, they will dictate terms but won't follow the same terms themselves, they think their reasoning process is superior to all other reasoning processes even though it's obviously flawed & they will stoop to the lowliest level to force their own personal views onto others. This sounds awfully like the dark ages to me!!

  • NoetPoet Dec 21, 2013

    @bestearth (continued)

    “There is nothing imaginary about spirit. Imagination creates. The illusion is identification with form not matter itself. As for sleight of hand that implies that someone is trying to mislead you and that's not true.”

    What evidence do you have that spirit is anything but imaginary? What makes you think that identification with spirit is any less illusory than identification with form?

    The sleight of hand that I referred to is primarily an act of self-deception on the part of those who perform it.

  • NoetPoet Dec 21, 2013

    @bestearth

    “Everything is spirit in terms of negative and positive . The densified parts we call matter.”

    What does the first sentence even mean? Do you have any evidence that matter is condensed spirit?

    “Spirit is primary I believe and at some point the One decided to create a beautiful game called physical life.”

    What exactly is “Spirit” and why is it primary? What is the One, and why would it decide to create life at some point? Some animals eat their own young, what is so beautiful about that?

    “If intuition is invalid to you then you'll experience the consequences of that view in your future lives until you have explored all that is related. In a future life your soul will make a breakthrough and have it's first experience of an immersion in Spirit. Your spirit will then arc along a new trajectory and you'll find yourself going places your mind has never been.”

    The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that we only get one life. The idea of future lives is a fantasy people believe so they don’t have to confront the terrifying reality of death.

    “You seem to take words seriously. I don't think anyone means to imply that you have no spirit or soul or that you are stuck in ego. There is a frantic irritation coming out of your words though. “

    Yes I do take words seriously. Particular words convey particular meanings; they are the key to intelligent communication, particularly on a written forum. Start throwing words around willy-nilly with little or no regard for their meanings and you might as well communicate with nothing but primitive grunts.

    I don’t mind if people say I have no spirit or soul because:
    1) I don’t believe that I, or anyone else, has a spirit or soul anyway
    2) Such concepts are at best poorly defined fictions

    The frantic irritation in my words is a figment of your imagination: you are looking for an excuse to dismiss the things I’m saying because they run headlong into your beliefs.

    “So what I am saying is that the qualities that we stereotypically associate with ego are operating on their own in the absense of their opposite and that's why people generally consider the ego to be the cold dark end of human psychology and regard it as a state disconnected from the whole which is spirit once again.”

    Human psychology is far too complex to reduce to a set of binary opposites. So what you’re essentially saying here is that “ego” and “spirit” are vague, generalised and not-very-useful concepts when it comes to understanding human psychology and behaviour. I agree.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 21, 2013

    If you’re a controlling science minded person or a controlling spiritual person you will push your own will, beliefs & concepts on to others as we have seen on this site. A controller doesn't want to see & especially discuss anything not of their own reasoning unless they can prove you wrong & again this has happened numerous times on this site. The problem of disproving others people's reasoning processes has it's down side, it often comes back onto the controller, in other words the controller can be proven wrong which again has happened numerous times.

    I do find it quite hilarious that when a controller is found to be wrong they will denounce what ever made them seem wrong like with psychology not being a science for example, they will also dictate the terms but won't follow these same terms they dictate to everybody else.

    This isn't having ago at anyone but making people aware of what their own controlling factors are doing, it can make one seem quite intellectually inadequate & hypocritical but what better way to hide these tendances than be controlling!!

    The current system we are under is quite inadequate because it's destroying so much of what we depend on for our own existence so what do we do to cover up this inadequacy? Become more & more controlling which science & multinationals are doing together. What would happen if we actually did the opposite? People who can only deductively reason & controllers would assume we would probably go back in evolution but is that a known fact without doubt? We must factor in within this evaluative deduction what we already know into this equation so in fact we wouldn’t go back in evolution. The next question is, would we evolve further if we released control? The problem with man he can only think one way, to be controlling, he knows very little of what would actually happen if he released this control!!

    Yes I know I'm only allowed to deductively reason on here according to some but!!

  • bestearth Dec 21, 2013

    You can believe whatever you want. You're not immune from the stuff.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Dec 21, 2013

    Re: "I deliberately choose to think this way and permit it to colour my world. It makes me happy, inspires me and connects me to divine principle. It is a felt connection which you currently don't share."

    Wonderful! I am certain that these beliefs are a comfort to you.
    However my question, "Do you afford others their beliefs as well, in return for the affordance you are granted " went unanswered.

  • bestearth Dec 21, 2013

    'These are merely your beliefs.'

    And they are changing the world right now. We shape energy with our beliefs. We are therefore all workers of form, sculptors who constanty reshape the energy pouring through us with our beliefs and imagination and feeling. Does that give you a concept of responsibility?

    We are all biased. Our conscious minds capture only a tiny tiny fraction of what streams through our multisensory system. We are 6 (at least) sensory beings not 5 sensory like we have been led to believe. We are powerful beyond measure. We are divine.

    Imagination is like a peg we place in the ground of our future both individual and collective. We attatch a rope to it which is like belief and winch ourselves there through desire and tenacity. This constitutes a divine vision for those who believe. The word 'merely' is not appropriate to such a powerful entity as belief.

    I deliberately choose to think this way and permit it to colour my world. It makes me happy, inspires me and connects me to divine principle. It is a felt connection which you currently don't share.

    I don't expect anyone to agree seeing as it's not possible to agree. Words often only approximate feelings.

    The universe is waiting for our next magic trick which we create with our beliefs. They will take us somewhere between hell and heaven.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 20, 2013

    I just wrote out a philosophical quotation that it quite appropriate I thought to this discussion.

    "A petal falls from a flower, is the flower still a flower!! It’s not until all the petals fall that the flower becomes no more a flower, are we too like the flower within our own common sense reasoning?".....Love Mathew

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Dec 20, 2013

    Re: Spirit is primary I believe

    This debate continues to rage on this site. This is what it boils down to though: So, you believe, so what. These are merely your beliefs. The question now becomes, "Do you afford others their beliefs as well, in return for the affordance you are granted, or must we all believe as you do?

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 19, 2013

    G'day bestearth

    Good summarisation however I'm not sure about the part in not being stuck in the ego.

    People/souls can associate too much to the ego thus become fixated to it's control, these controlling effects, I believe, can fixate a soul &/or person to a certain egoist dynamics however this doesn’t mean that one will always be fixated to these egoist dynamics, look at me!!

    A few yrs ago I was on here but I couldn’t take the egotism however today I might be still pointing out my awareness of the controlling ego to those in need but I’m obviously more accepting of them. Many spiritually aware people have told me why I continue to communicate with these people, the answer is acceptance & knowing that what I point out in others is also in me to express at any time I will as they are doing. Are these people wrong in being ego controlled? Most definitely not however if we are going to make a better existence for ourselves we must change tack that is as old as mankind itself.

    We are still continuing reading the same books over & over again, the words within the story might change like evolutional changes or technological advancements but the story itself is still the same. If you look back in human history this tells us so.

  • bestearth Dec 19, 2013

    Everything is spirit in terms of negative and positive . The densified parts we call matter.

    Spirit is primary I believe and at some point the One decided to create a beautiful game called physical life. It's a mystery that can't be penetrated only lived. This is only my view but it is based on what I've read and experienced personally. If intuition is invalid to you then you'll experience the consequences of that view in your future lives until you have explored all that is related. In a future life your soul will make a breakthrough and have it's first experience of an immersion in Spirit. Your spirit will then arc along a new trajectory and you'll find yourself going places your mind has never been. Eye roll if you like.

    I'll experience the consequences of my biases.

    You seem to take words seriously. I don't think anyone means to imply that you have no spirit or soul or that you are stuck in ego. There is a frantic irritation coming out of your words though.

    The opposites are needed to drive a dynamic. In electricity plus and minus are needed to create flow between them. In magnetism north and south are needed to drive the field. Psychology has the equivalent qualities of physical properties. For example hard and soft are opposites. Dark and light are physical properties that are opposites. Hot and cold, another.

    If you look at the physical properties of both 'dark and 'cold', neither of them is self existant, they rely on the absence of their opposite to exist. Walk into a room with a torch and the dark disappears. So what I am saying is that the qualities that we stereotypically associate with ego are operating on their own in the absense of their opposite and that's why people generally consider the ego to be the cold dark end of human psychology and regard it as a state disconnected from the whole which is spirit once again.

    There is nothing imaginary about spirit. Imagination creates. The illusion is identification with form not matter itself. As for sleight of hand that implies that someone is trying to mislead you and that's not true.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 19, 2013

    G'day bestearth

    I'm just wondering for the people looking on at this discussion who is shaking their heads, they must be thinking there is no way that we can think our way out of extinction going by what's happening here.

    Bestearth, I'm quite definitely wrong in my assumption that we can think our way out of extinction, I think you are quite correct when you mentioned something about thinking is all to do with the ego & control. Spirituality is actually about releasing control not securing it.

    I wrote up a post just recently for my blog, I would really like you to read it & tell me honestly what you think.

    http://www.mgnaismith.blogspot.com.au/2013/12/quietness-supposition-of.html

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 19, 2013

    G'day NoetPeot

    Once again you are quite incorrect & have gone off half cocked.

    Yes I am voicing my concern especially on here about the CONTROLLING EGO as opposed to just ego which you keep deceivingly & continually miss quote which again falls under the label of control freak.

    This is funny & quite hypocritical, so it's OK for you to demonise other people's reasoning processes but it's not alright for others to demonise anything, this is like everybody else should keep to the topic but you, like you have suggested in another topic!! You are highly dictating your own terms which again comes under the title of control freak, please desist.

  • NoetPoet Dec 19, 2013

    @bestearth
    “Hey dude, I don't think Mathew is demonising the ego. He's just using language that describes it. I think you're over reacting a little.”

    Really?? After the way Mathew’s carried on you think *I’m* the one overreacting??

    So you reckon he isn’t demonising the ego?? Well the definition of “demonise” is “to portray as wicked or threatening”, and Mathew has gone to great pains to emphasise how wicked and threatening the ego is over the past week and a half. Again, see The Devil thread for a prime example of this demonization. Now he’s posted a Sai Baba quote in this thread which talks about the ego’s “devious ways” and how it “degrades man from the golden glory”. To describe something as devious and degrading – whether in your own words or by quoting someone else you hold in high esteem – is to unequivocally portray it as wicked and threatening, and to therefore demonise it.
    You say that Mathew is just using language to describe the ego, but is using overwhelmingly negative language and he has not proposed a clear coherent objective definition of “ego” (although he has more recently ‘borrowed’ my ideas about what the ego is). Instead what he’s done is take a bunch of negative personality qualities and arbitrarily lump them under the one category of “ego”. By doing this he both inhibits the possibility of better understanding such qualities and he fabricates an enemy, a metaphysical bogeyman where one does not and need not exist.

    “Here's a little list that describes some differences between ego qualities and spirit qualities. I'm not implying that one is better than other. People are at where ever they are at”

    It looks like you’re employing the same fallacious ham-fisted taxonomical approach as Mathew, i.e. take a bunch of negative personality qualities and lump them altogether under the one overarching term, and then insinuate that this term therefore describes a common Source Of All Evil from which all those negative qualities arise. But all you (and Mathew) have done here is perform a logical sleight-of-hand. Furthermore the categorisation of desirable “spirit” qualities accomplishes the mirror image of the “ego” categorisation: it inhibits the possibility of better understanding such desirable qualities in their own right, and it fabricates an imaginary goal which distracts people from developing those qualities because they are baselessly asserted to originate from this one common source called “spirit”.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 19, 2013

    G'day bestearth

    Thanks for the support, I can be a .little controlling myself I have to admit however I don't think to the extent of what's being displayed here on occasions by others, dirty tricks are a good sign of a control freak.

    The ego certainly dictates everything what we are destructively & constructively & in turn dictates what this reality is going to be like, it would be a nice change to get away from this controlling ego. I think commenting on IONS has certainly made me more aware of the controlling ego factors & how at times it can literally blind us to any other kind of reasoning.

    I see by just expressing the ego as opposed to being controlled by the ego is a lot more constructive, what do you reckon (think).

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 19, 2013

    G'day NoetPeot

    "Nice try re-stating that quote out of context. You crack me up..."

    What the heck are you on about, what quote?

    “See how the sacred old flamingoes come,
    Painting with shadow all the marble steps:
    Aged and wise, they seek their wonted perches
    Within the temple, devious walking, made
    To wander by their melancholy minds.”

    William Butler

    “It is difficult indeed to understand the ego in its depth and devious ways. It is an inert entity, that is to say, it cannot know itself not can it know others; It has no fear; it will not bend before others; it degrades man from the golden glory, which is his due, to the level of lowly dust.”

    Sri Sathya Sai Baba

  • bestearth Dec 19, 2013

    Hey dude, I don't think Mathew is demonising the ego. He's just using language that describes it. I think you're over reacting a little. Here's a little list that describes some differences between ego qualities and spirit qualities. I'm not implying that one is better than other. People are at where ever they are at.

    From Deepak Chopras 'The Return of Merlin'

    "Rider on the Hill" relates the eternal clash between the spirit and ego. The spirit is carefree and lighthearted, and full of laughter. The ego is serious, arrogant, and contentious. In one there is peace harmony and love, in the other fear and hostility.

    from Sonia Choquette's 'Travelling at the Speed of Love'

    Speed of Love Fear

    Tolerant Intolerant
    Generous Stingy
    Humourous Droll
    At ease Uptight
    Light-hearted Heavy
    Timeless Dated
    Confident Insecure
    Alive Dead
    Humble Arrogant
    Accepting Rejecting
    Receptive Tuned out

  • NoetPoet Dec 18, 2013

    Nice try re-stating that quote out of context. You crack me up...

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 18, 2013

    G'day NoetPeot

    “Of course your ego is going to tell you this; it doesn't want to hear anything to the contrary so it will want you to stick your head in the sand, how do you think the ego works?”

    What is so demonizing about this, it's stating a fact not a supposition. If I said, " of course your negative horrid ego is going to tell you this" I would understand your stance but sorry it didn't even hint this.

    "you don't realise it's the ego & controlling ego that dictates to us how we think & reason"

    So this is demonising the ego to you as well, you better seek help. It’s making people aware of the controlling factors of the ego which you seem to debunk because of your own controlling ego doesn’t want it to relate to you I would say.

    Is this going to end up like the last conversation we had when you made no sense depicting no soldiers are forced by gun point to act out egotism, of course they were but you came up with all this lame stuff like you are obviously doing now. Once again thanks for proving my point about controlling egos. You really don’t have any idea in what I am talking about in regards to the controlling ego do you.

    It’s also funny the two people who are the most controlling have spoken out about my stance in regards to the controlling ego, that alone should tell you something but it won’t of course because of the controlling ego!!!

  • NoetPoet Dec 18, 2013

    “Then you have obviously read very little of what I have written or are you only reading into what I right what you only want to see??”

    No I don’t think so. Almost every post you’ve made in the past week and a half has included derogatory references to the ego. For example, here’s an excerpt from The Devil thread:
    ……
    Me: "Ego is not evil and it does not deserve to be vilified by being equated with the Devil."

    You: “Of course your ego is going to tell you this; it doesn't want to hear anything to the contrary so it will want you to stick your head in the sand, how do you think the ego works?”
    ……….

    Admittedly some of your recent posts – i.e. AFTER your initial exposure to more nuanced alternative views on the ego – display a more balanced attitude, but nevertheless the way you talk about the ego is inconsistent and obsessive.

    “Show me where I have actually demonised the ego as opposed to the controlling ego? I'm also not sure where you get where I am even demonising the controlling ego, all I am doing is showing you, or should I say you & Dusty are showing us, how destructive & deceptive the controlling ego can be.
    It is obvious that you don't realise it's the ego & controlling ego that dictates to us how we think & reason therefore live our lives, it has everything to do with all of what we do period so I think it's worth a mention especially when there are a few people on here obviously controlled by the ego & again you won't or can't see it which I find quite interesting. “

    In one breath you say you’re not demonising the ego, yet in the very next breath you demonise it!

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 18, 2013

    G'day NoetPoet

    Then you have obviously read very little of what I have written or are you only reading into what I right what you only want to see??

    Show me where I have actually demonised the ego as opposed to the controlling ego? I'm also not sure where you get where I am even demonising the controlling ego, all I am doing is showing you, or should I say you & Dusty are showing us, how destructive & deceptive the controlling ego can be.

    It is obvious that you don't realise it's the ego & controlling ego that dictates to us how we think & reason therefore live our lives, it has everything to do with all of what we do period so I think it's worth a mention especially when there are a few people on here obviously controlled by the ego & again you won't or can't see it which I find quite interesting.

  • NoetPoet Dec 18, 2013

    @mrmathew1963, did someone hack into your account yesterday? Demonising the ego is all you've done!

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 18, 2013

    G’day frequencytuner

    I watched the last vid you supplied, yes there is more right than wrong in the world. I suppose when we watch, hear or read the news it’s mostly of doom & gloom which has helped to condition us to think there is more wrong than right in the world, who’s to blame? How can you blame anyone when we are all victims of circumstance?

    The ego is but a tool we use, do we cast blame on the user or the tool itself? When the user is using such a tool knowingly unwisely we blame the user & when a user of such a tool has no idea in how to use such a tool we blame the tool for existing. Blame is pointless however one must question in how we use such a tool either in a controlling way or just being expressive of such a tool. Circumstance tells us how we will use the tool however circumstance is a part of how we are going to use such a tool, it’s a part of our ego makeup & this is where we need to be aware in how we use such a tool.

    When I point out the negatives of the controlling ego I’m not casting blame, all I’m trying to do is make people aware of what they are doing when the ego is in control, I also show more often than not how constructive the ego is as well especially to spiritually aware people who have demonised it.

  • NoetPoet Dec 17, 2013

    @ frequencytuner (continued)

    “The Ego is not leading the planet to extinction, yet it is allowing one powerful force to suppress the other. As in the case of Edison and Tesla, it was the spirit of greed, competition and dominance that decided the fate of these men, not the ego of one man: not even J.P. Morgan. “

    The ego is just the personal interface between the human organism and its environment. It doesn’t “allow” forces to dominate one and other, it simply utilises whatever resources it has at its disposal. Re the fate of Edison and Tesla: are you talking about how they became two of the most accomplished and admired scientists in human history?

    “Albeit there may have been shady undertakings surrounding these men, it boils down to the social paradigm of dominance, ownership and power. Once the collective "ego" (the society itself) rids these ideals from its consciousness it will allow for co-operation, stewardship and justice. In simple words: it was said once before on this thread and I will repeat it: We have to "love" our way out of extinction. Salvation comes from the heart.”

    Co-operation works except when it doesn’t. Just ask the Russians and the Chinese.

    Power, dominance and ownership are necessary elements of an orderly and civilised society. As social organisms we humans simply cannot live without them, however subtle they might be sometimes. Justice requires power in order to dispense that justice; co-operation requires at least some degree of ownership so that people have sufficient motivation to co-operate in pursuit of a common goal; and stewardship requires the ability to exercise dominance over others with respect to that which you have stewardship over.

  • NoetPoet Dec 17, 2013

    @frequencytuner

    “ For example, Thomas Edison invented Direct Current Energy using a logical process and scientific method. Electricity was created, yet it was not sustainable, efficient or designed using nature's laws - it was designed according to man's laws (which is like trying to get a circle into a square hole by smashing it with a hammer until the corners are sheared off and it falls through). Nikola Tesla, on the other hand, "discovered" Alternating Current by studying nature and using an intuitive method of invention. This form of electricity was more in harmony with nature and thus was incomparable to DC (Hoover Dam vs. a car battery).”

    Direct Current is still useful and wholly consistent with the laws of nature. If it were not consistent with the laws of nature then it would be impossible. Telsa used the scientific method just as much as any other scientist, if he hadn’t then no fellow scientists (including Edison) or financial backers (like JP Morgan) would have taken him seriously and his name would be unknown to us today. Telsa may have had different sources of inspiration to Edison, but they were both scientists who relied on the scientific method and mindset.

    ” To sum up: we are referring to whole brain function as opposed to strictly left brain (male dominant) "thinking".”

    So I take it you’re either a woman or a self-loathing man. FYI males do not ‘own’ so-called left brain thinking; neurology shows us that men and women alike naturally have both a left brain hemisphere and a right brain hemisphere.

    “At this point it would be good to direct our attention to the hand that holds the scales of power, as this is the more relevant discussion. We can call the right brain passive feminine and say Dan Brown was correct in his novels about the suppression of the feminine. This is not due to any cause other than the male dominance simply doing what it does by it's very nature: which is dominate. "Ego" (collective consciousness), in this respect, is an essential part of the problem, and also paramount to effecting a solution. It is this "Ego mind" that allows the male destructive domination to maintain it's dominion over the self. “

    You have a lot of negative things to say about masculinity, but you’re also clearly quite fond of “passive” femininity. I daresay that: 1) you are beholden to tired outdated pop-psychology stereotypes of masculinity and femininity; and 2) you’ve never been to an all-girls school.

  • frequencytuner Dec 17, 2013

    Here is an even better one: http://www.gaiamtv.com/video/i-am

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Dec 17, 2013

    Great resource that will again be wasted on those that ignore them. (read "limited downloads")

  • frequencytuner Dec 17, 2013

    1. 13 minutes to describe the history of the 'ego': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A
    2. 5 minutes by Matt Damon on Civil Obedience: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KxOVy52EiE

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Dec 17, 2013

    Re: collective consciousness, the mind of society.

    This is not "consciousness" that all in any common definition. The mind of society lacks a prefrontal cortex. What i being described is some aspects of network dynamics much like a standing ovation or a mob action.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 17, 2013

    G'day frequencytuner

    It would seem the solution you mention is in line with mine, cease the ego being controlling by becoming aware of it's controlling factors. A lot of people try to take control of the ego but that is still being of the controlling ego because it takes the ego to control anything. Once we are aware of it's controlling factors all we are then doing is expressing the ego without the ego being in control.

    If you are saying that the ego isn’t to blame especially when it’s not controlling I concur however I do see the controlling factors of the ego being dominating & without this dominating factor we wouldn’t be in the mess we are today I believe so it is questionable in my mind when it’s controlling. This reality would be somewhat different if we didn’t have a controlling ego to contend with.

    For love to be unifying we would have to replace envy, hate, spite, violence with love otherwise love just becomes another factor controlled by the ego which is at times referred to as lust however just by being aware of the egos controlling factors should automatically replace these unbecoming traits with love.

    I do concur with you just in a slightly different way.

  • frequencytuner Dec 17, 2013

    Try to imagine the ego itself being controlled, as a slave so to speak, if we define the ego as the collective consciousness, the mind of society. Granted, an Oligarchical free market financial system that resembles the Feudal system does play a pivotal role in maintaining this imbalance, it is not to blame. If the Ego is of a feminine nature, it will be passive and allow itself to be controlled, thus we see a passive society. If the ego is of a masculine nature, it will be dominant and seek control. All things are of a dual nature, as we know, so it can be understood that the ego is "secretly" controlling itself in a parasitic way as a means of survival: male feeding off of the female.

    The solution, as quoted from many spiritual texts, is matrimony between these male and female energies, which includes the individual uniting with the collective, the rich sharing with the poor and the strong helping the weak. Instead of the ego being parasitic, it needs to be symbiotic so there can be a mutual benefit. This symbiosis is created through - again - Love. Love is the unifying, universal truth or law that will bring unity and harmony to the self: the universe. Greed, envy, spite, violence and cruelty are barbaric and evoke 'fear', while charity, benevolence and stewardship are universal values embodied under the term "love".

    Pay it Forward, what a Golden concept!

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 16, 2013

    G'day frequencytuner

    It's funny how we all think or perceive differently, I think the ego can be quite destructive & is leading this world to extinction. Multinationals are a good example of this because they don't seem to care what they destroy or who they harm to gain a few dollars more in the cheapest way possible. Unemployment is a good example of making a few dollars more in the cheapest possible way.

    Yes blame is of the ego but so is the feminine self with mothering however feminine mothering is far more passive. I'm not actually putting blame on the ego because I also see the ego being quite constructive however I am aware of the destructive nature of the controlling ego, that's exactly what I try to relay.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 16, 2013

    G'day NoetPoet

    You don't think the ego can be as constructive as it is destructive? It's funny how differently we look at the ego. I also think you are quite correct with the Einstein quote.

  • frequencytuner Dec 16, 2013

    Precisely NoetPoet. For example, Thomas Edison invented Direct Current Energy using a logical process and scientific method. Electricity was created, yet it was not sustainable, efficient or designed using nature's laws - it was designed according to man's laws (which is like trying to get a circle into a square hole by smashing it with a hammer until the corners are sheared off and it falls through). Nikola Tesla, on the other hand, "discovered" Alternating Current by studying nature and using an intuitive method of invention. This form of electricity was more in harmony with nature and thus was incomparable to DC (Hoover Dam vs. a car battery). To sum up: we are referring to whole brain function as opposed to strictly left brain (male dominant) "thinking".

    At this point it would be good to direct our attention to the hand that holds the scales of power, as this is the more relevant discussion. We can call the right brain passive feminine and say Dan Brown was correct in his novels about the suppression of the feminine. This is not due to any cause other than the male dominance simply doing what it does by it's very nature: which is dominate. "Ego" (collective consciousness), in this respect, is an essential part of the problem, and also paramount to effecting a solution. It is this "Ego mind" that allows the male destructive domination to maintain it's dominion over the self. The Ego is not leading the planet to extinction, yet it is allowing one powerful force to suppress the other. As in the case of Edison and Tesla, it was the spirit of greed, competition and dominance that decided the fate of these men, not the ego of one man: not even J.P. Morgan.

    I was told Edison invented the light bulb in elementary school with no mention of Tesla ever. Can we blame Edison for this? Morgan? Ego? There is no blame to be dealt, it simply is the result of what the society (the collective) allowed. Albeit there may have been shady undertakings surrounding these men, it boils down to the social paradigm of dominance, ownership and power. Once the collective "ego" (the society itself) rids these ideals from its consciousness it will allow for co-operation, stewardship and justice. In simple words: it was said once before on this thread and I will repeat it: We have to "love" our way out of extinction. Salvation comes from the heart.

  • NoetPoet Dec 16, 2013

    @ bestearth

    “Thinking is what the ego likes. The sensable place to dwell must be the heart. It's the centre of the body and energy systems.“
    Dwell in the organ which is responsible for pumping blood around the body? How would that help? The heart is neither the geophysical, gravitational nor control centre of the body.

    “The ego has no ability other than to 'think' of ways to control everything. It has no imagination, no creativity and it's only means of survival is to hijack the creativity and productivity of others. It hooks onto the traces of guilt, shame and uncertainty in others. It is parasitic in nature feeding on the resistant, struggling psychology of others. “

    Maybe your ego is that way, if it is then I sincerely recommend that you get counselling. Funny thing though is that history’s most accomplished innovators and achievers often had huge egos propelling them toward success, e.g. Thomas Edison, Steve Jobs, Werner Von Braun, Andy Warhol, and many others. Egos come with benefits and costs, just like everything else in life.

    “The ego is a toxic whirlpool whose end point is suicide or some form of destruction.”

    If this were true then sentient life would never have evolved beyond the level of fish.

    “Toxic thoughts lead to toxic emotions to toxic actions to toxic body become toxic habits that inwhorl to every permutation of suffering and pain. The ambitious ego fancies himself as the king rat in a sewer. It is arrogant and seeks contention to keep itself alive. Because it has turned it's back on creation and the creator, its only power is to control and dominate others.”

    Just because some egos are afflicted by pathology doesn’t mean they all are (or have to be).

    “A good way to repel an ego is to ask them "How's your Spirit?" You'll get a perplexed look at the least because the ego is the opposite of Spirit. The ego thinks, the Spirit feels. The ego relies on cunning but it's intelligence is static. The Spirit relies on intuition and it's intelligence is fluid.”

    Please explain. One who feels their way through life is VERY vulnerable to exploitation by those who are cunning and intelligent enough to exploit and manipulate the feelings of others.

  • NoetPoet Dec 16, 2013

    @ frequencytuner
    Re: "’No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.’" - Albert Einstein

    In other words, thinking is the mechanism that leads to extinction.

    Just a thought to ponder.”

    I don’t think that’s what Einstein meant at all by that. What he meant was that we had to use a higher level of thinking than the one which created the problem. I have also seen that same quote with “thinking” or “mind” used instead of “consciousness”.

    If anything *not* thinking would be more likely to lead to extinction. For example: not thinking about consequences of dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere; not thinking about the risks of putting a nuclear power plant on top of a fault line right next to the ocean; not thinking about how CFCs can affect the ozone layer. In fact it is precisely *because* people – particularly scientists – have THOUGHT about these problems that we have been given a chance to deal with them before they became a threat to the existence of humankind!

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 16, 2013

    G'day frequencytuner

    Most definitely that is why when you change the way we think we change consciously, all we really need to do is change the way we think. If you have noticed, right through human history when we have consciously changed our thinking patterns have also changed, at the moment we are stuck on consumerist materialism which denotes a huge explosion of the controlling ego, this is limiting us thus any change needed won't come about because of our limitations to the controlling ego. Yes I know it seems I have limited knowledge base but the ego dictates our thoughts & actions in everything we do including becoming spiritually aware, we need to be more aware of this if we really are fair dinkum in making real changes.

  • frequencytuner Dec 16, 2013

    "No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it." - Albert Einstein

    In other words, thinking is the mechanism that leads to extinction.

    Just a thought to ponder.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 14, 2013

    G'day bestearth

    Yes indeed, once we see a problem or something to counteract the ego is at play & this is where there is no right & wrong comes into it, I've written about this a few times. I do however see a difference between expressing the ego to being controlled by the ego & again there is no right or wrong in being expressive or being controlled by the ego. Once we see a right or wrong the egos at play again & we have all done this even at times unbeknownst to ourselves.

    Saying all this I think we can think our way out of this mess but only if we are aware enough, yes this is the ego at play again however the difference is in the awareness of being expressive of the ego as opposed to being controlled by the ego. Being human we can't get away in not being expressive of the ego, every time we get dressed to what foods we eat all comes down to ego however the difference is in being expressive of the ego to being controlled by the ego. A person controlled by the ego will take some time getting dressed but a person being expressive of the ego will just wear clothing suited to the occasion. No matter what we do we are all expressive of the ego.

    This all comes back to needing to think our way out of this mess which by the way at the spiritual level isn't a mess to me however at the human level it is & it's this expressiveness of the ego that will change this reality first mentally then physically I believe. A lot of spiritually aware people will avoid conflicting with others which by the way comes down to judgement which is again expressive of the ego however for real change to occur at the expressive ego level, (human level), we need to be, at times, quite strongly expressive of the ego without being controlled by the ego for real change to take effect. The trick is not to become controlled by the ego again for in this lays more lies & chaos.

    I can see where you are coming from but it won't, in it's entirety, change this reality. Physical intervention is needed & the right kind of physical intervention that isn't controlled by the ego, could you imagine a reality not controlled by the ego but a reality just being expressive of the ego which we can't avoid in our present form? Jesus, Buddha & alike weren’t egotistical beings just because they were expressive of the ego & they did need to be expressive of the ego for us to learn from them.

    When sitting within my own quietens it would seem we need to do very little however coming out of this conscious state we do need to do something which again will be expressive of the ego. I do think while within this quietness we can be delusional & start to think we need to do very little but that has never been the case in anytime in human history. We are expressive ego beings, that is unavoidable within our current state of being. Actually being aware of our awareness states is also expressive of the ego believe it or not so no matter what we feel& think it’s still of the ego.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Dec 14, 2013

    Ego is a construct to describes some part of our "self", but we still need to observe the whole self in balance, without killing off this thing labeled "ego" Anything written on the topic of ego is an invented or perhaps formulated is a better choice of words, with no evidence to support any conceptual perspectives.
    .
    Increasingly, psychologists are stepping away from the word Freud popularized. Daniel Kahneman's book, "Thinking Fast and Slow" uses new terms that avoid preconceptions and explains the process on the mind in a more comprehensive manner.

  • bestearth Dec 14, 2013

    G'day Mathew,

    Thinking is what the ego likes. The sensable place to dwell must be the heart. It's the centre of the body and energy systems. The mind's thinking is like a shed full of tools when something needs to be measured/analysed. Then tools down and back to the heart, which is home.

    The ego has no ability other than to 'think' of ways to control everything. It has no imagination, no creativity and it's only means of survival is to hijack the creativity and productivity of others. It hooks onto the traces of guilt, shame and uncertainty in others. It is parasitic in nature feeding on the resistant, struggling psychology of others.

    If you don't have any guilt, shame, uncertainty, there is nothing for an ego to latch onto. An ego will never bother you.

    The ego is a toxic whirlpool whose end point is suicide or some form of destruction. Toxic thoughts lead to toxic emotions to toxic actions to toxic body become toxic habits that inwhorl to every permutation of suffering and pain. The ambitious ego fancies himself as the king rat in a sewer. It is arrogant and seeks contention to keep itself alive. Because it has turned it's back on creation and the creator, its only power is to control and dominate others.

    A good way to repel an ego is to ask them "How's your Spirit?" You'll get a perplexed look at the least because the ego is the opposite of Spirit. The ego thinks, the Spirit feels. The ego relies on cunning but it's intelligence is static. The Spirit relies on intuition and it's intelligence is fluid.

    So I don't think we can think our way out of extinction. I don't feel there will be any extinction. We can''t feel our way out of extinction either because that would be a negative goal. We can feel our way into our own individual true self which leads to the true calling which leaves behind all concepts and flavours of fear for the expansive smorgasbord of Love's permutations. With no victims left the ego is out of business. This is the positive path that I believe connects us to creation and to natural understanding, joyful living and learning.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 12, 2013

    I think it’s quite clear, going by the comments in recent days, that it would seem quite impossible that we can think our way out of extinction mainly because of the blinding effect of the controlling ego which dominates this reality. What would have to happen is we would have to collectively become aware of such human traits but it’s obvious that this particular trait is built upon blind faith & anything this blind usually needs a catastrophe or two to come out of it.

    We do indeed need to think differently but if we have a dominating force who is controlled by the ego it would seem we have very little chance.

  • NoetPoet Dec 12, 2013

    I'm looking forward to all the anonymous Free Energy how-to blogs ;)

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 12, 2013

    G'day NoetPoet

    Again you have flawed me with your responses, you win. Your fooled in believing what is expected of you obviously & that is OK as well for some but not me. Trust me, you have no idea what so ever.

  • NoetPoet Dec 11, 2013

    Re: “Once again you didn't answer my question but you demand me to answer yours. Let me ask you a question, would you have liked your children to have been experimented on in this way for the good of all mankind? “
    I did answer your questions, including that one. Read my posts.

    RE: “In relation to the free energy devices, your controlling ego just doesn't want to see any possibility of free energy devices being viable obviously.”
    I would love it if free energy devices were real and viable. But my common sense, everything I know about science, my BS radar, and the total absence of any proven free energy devices in operation all strongly suggest that free energy devices are nothing more than fantasies concocted and believed by people who literally want something for nothing.

    Re: “I'm sorry but your funny & somewhat naïve, if people have been pumped off for disclosing such devices I would have to be an idiot wouldn't I to do just that.”
    Yeah I’ve heard it all before okay. That’s why I said you should release it guerrilla style through anonymous blogs and word of mouth. If you can teach enough people about it in a short enough amount of time then the Big Corporate Baddies won’t come after you because there will be no point in doing so: it only makes sense for them to silence you BEFORE the knowledge of such devices becomes widespread.

    Re: “What was witching hunting about in the dark ages? It threatened the ideological principles of the churches. If someone came out with a free energy device that also threatens the current religious ideology of consumerist materialism what do they do?”
    So do you know any people who have been burnt at the stake lately? How much of a witch hunt can there really be if you can shout about it on a public internet forum? And what makes you think that a free energy device would threaten consumerist materialism? Right now the world is desperate for a viable replacement for fossil fuels so we can keep the consumerist party going, and a free energy device would be like mana from heaven for the global economy.

    RE: “Look NoetPoet you really can't see how the controlling ego is manipulating you, you have proven it time & time again in conversation with me that is exactly what is happening but obviously unbeknownst to you.”
    Now you’re just projecting.

    Re: “I am really sorry if I have offended you, I just didn't know because you seemed at first to be a fairly open minded literate person, I am really fair dinkumly sorry mate.”
    I am open-minded, but open-minded is not the same as believing any and every crazy fantasy which might strike your fancy.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 10, 2013

    G'day NeotPoet

    Look mate I think you better seriously study up on your history, they tested these devices especially in the fifties did they not.

    Once again you didn't answer my question but you demand me to answer yours. Let me ask you a question, would you have liked your children to have been experimented on in this way for the good of all mankind?

    In relation to the free energy devices, your controlling ego just doesn't want to see any possibility of free energy devices being viable obviously.

    RE: "Of course you can’t, and the obvious reason is that you don’t really know."

    I'm sorry but your funny & somewhat naïve, if people have been pumped off for disclosing such devices I would have to be an idiot wouldn't I to do just that. Your making very little sense period because your ego is in full control here, can't you see that?

    RE: "But we’re not thinking the same way we did in the dark ages'

    What was witching hunting about in the dark ages? It threatened the ideological principles of the churches. If someone came out with a free energy device that also threatens the current religious ideology of consumerist materialism what do they do?

    Are we still breeding war mongers? Yes

    Is consumerist materialism based on fear? Yes for one example not being able to keep up with the Joneses or being bumped off because of inventing free energy devices that would hurt the multinationals pockets.

    Are we still being dominated by the controlling ego which determines how we think? Yes, do you want me to go on so how can't you see where we are still stuck in the darg ages? I will give you a guess, it has something to do with your controlling ego not allowing you to become aware of more than your ego wished you too.

    Look NoetPoet you really can't see how the controlling ego is manipulating you, you have proven it time & time again in conversation with me that is exactly what is happening but obviously unbeknownst to you.

    I am really sorry if I have offended you, I just didn't know because you seemed at first to be a fairly open minded literate person, I am really fair dinkumly sorry mate.

  • NoetPoet Dec 10, 2013

    Re: “ If we are still thinking in the same way we did in the dark ages how are we going to think our way out of extinction? “

    But we’re not thinking the same way we did in the dark ages, not even close! In fact we have evolved a great deal from the dark ages. You’ve obviously never experienced the life of a medieval peasant either if you think otherwise. Notice I say that we have “evolved”, not “transformed” or “changed” because it is the nature of evolution that existing material and information is modified piecemeal over time.

    Re: “Recently I was told war is good”

    No, I said that war can lead to good things. Try to understand and appreciate the difference. War exists because it is still useful to people, for reasons I have already mentioned. War will only cease to exist when it ceases to be useful *for all concerned*.

  • NoetPoet Dec 10, 2013

    Re: ”I know the answer to this but I can’t give it for obvious reasons”

    Of course you can’t, and the obvious reason is that you don’t really know. There is no such thing as “free” in this world; everything comes with a cost/ trade-off. You may not be able to see that cost, or you may not want to see it, but that doesn’t make it go away. But if you or someone you know really does think they’ve developed a working free energy device, then why go all Wiki-leaks with it and post schematics and details of relevant operational principles on YouTube and free blogs throughout the internet? Why not share the knowledge and schematics with your friends and family for free and ask them to ‘pay it forward’ to other people? I mean you yourself have said that the corporate baddies who run the world will never allow such devices to reach the market and earn their inventors any money, so why not just gift the knowledge and schematics to all of mankind for free? But then again maybe we should all just wait for Iceland to start cranking out those free energy devices. Should be any day now…

  • NoetPoet Dec 10, 2013

    Every lesson requires mistakes. Every application of a lesson inevitably paves the way for new mistakes. In fact we could even go so far as to say that life is a series of mistakes. Whether or not the new mistakes are bigger than the old ones depends largely on your point of view, but based on the general trajectory of human history I’d say that the mistakes we’re making now are far preferable to the ones we made in the past. Of course if you’re determined to see the negative in everything, even in things like longer life expectancy, then no amount of reasoning is going to get through to you.

    Re: fallout sufferers

    Two nuclear bombs have been used in the history of war. Yes they caused terrible carnage and suffering, but that’s kind of my point: their destructive power was so horrific that it not only expedited the surrender of Japan before the Soviets had the chance to invade and establish a North Korea-style communist regime, but it also impressed upon the world just how incredibly costly a future world war would be (particularly if both sides had nukes). So yes, it was for the greater good of mankind, and if you think that’s harsh well then guess what: we live in a harsh world, a world where actions have consequences. Would I like my own children experimented on with fallout? Of course not, but that’s because I know *from the experiences of previous fallout experiments* how bad fallout can be. What is worse: a tragedy which we learn from, or a tragedy we repeat?

    Yes I have looked into “free” energy devices and what their proponents *claim* they can do. What I have found is a handful of devices which MIGHT be legitimate and a huge array of cranks and frauds. In any case I have never seen a working “free” energy machine myself, and I have certainly never seen any serious discussion about the potential impacts of their widespread deployment. But I have read a lot of “dog ate my homework”-type excuses for why these devices never see the light of day.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 10, 2013

    The heading of this discussion is, “Can we think our way out of extinction”. If we are still thinking in the same way we did in the dark ages how are we going to think our way out of extinction?

    This supposed new way of living & thinking is still witch hunting, the ideologies are still based on fear, our emotions are still dominated by the controlling ego & we still have a warring hierarchy of dominance. All of what is mentioned here has always been in one form or another, all we have done is modified & disguised what has always been, the same mentality still exists from warring tribes.

    Recently I was told war is good, see how much our mentality has changed, it hasn’t so how are we going to think our way out of extinction? Change the way the ego controls us because after all we are the ones in control not the ego however the current system/ego wants you to believe otherwise.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 09, 2013

    G’day NoetPoet

    Take a look at the link to see what the Icelanders did to your multinationals because you do seem to be protecting their corrupt system.

    http://www.wakingtimes.com/2013/03/21/why-did-the-media-keep-the-recent-peaceful-icelandic-revolution-quiet/

    I actually would suggest anyone who has a free or relatively free energy device to go to Iceland to develop it, at least they don’t seem to be ruled as much by corrupt multinational like the rest of the world.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 09, 2013

    G'day NoetPoet

    Yes we have learnt to counteract our mistakes by making even bigger mistakes like getting away from coal burning to fracking or improving on medicines to keep us ill, yes we are living longer because it's beneficial to the system to keep us around longer, don't fool yourself.

    I just wasn't referring to WMDs however try telling the people who suffered from fallout that it was for the good of all mankind, how many soldiers were experimented on in this way.

    Let me ask you a question, would you have liked your children to have been experimented on in this way for the good of all mankind?

    RE: "I ask again, how do you know that "free" energy devices are the key to sustainability?"

    Your becoming quite demanding aren't you which is a sign of what?

    Have you ever looked into these devices & what they claim they can do, if not I suggest you do before demanding an answer from me again because if you did you wouldn't have asked me this question in the first place!! Take a simple device that gives you free clean electricity, what do you think this would mean to everyone & this is but one example? Yes people who are egotistically controlled say the world economy will collapse but how do they know this would definitely happen? The point is they don't plus all they are doing, like a typical religion, they instil fear.

    RE: “How do you even know they are truly free?”

    I know the answer to this but I can’t give it for obvious reasons & don’t bother pushing me on this. I do know of one devise in particular that is quite user friendly except it might have a very slight carbine footprint but nothing to what we are using today. I suggest you do a little more research on what the effects of what we are doing now & what could be available to us that will greatly decrees our carbine footprint in the future, no offence intended.

  • NoetPoet Dec 09, 2013

    We are learning all the time. In the mid 20th century we learnt about the dangers of pesticides, cigarettes, CFCs and greenhouse gases. Developed countries have since taken substantial measures address the first three of these, and despite recalcitrance from some quarters there is an active effort throughout much of the developed and developing world to lower greenhouse emissions. The learning in all of these cases has required experience and painful consequences, but nonetheless it still happened. As for devising quicker ways of destroying everything, if you're referring to WMDs then I have to disagree with you: the advent of WMDs, nuclear weapons in particular, has been a major factor in preventing major regional and global conflicts like those that occured in the early 20th century.

    I ask again, how do you know that "free" energy devices are the key to sustainability? How do you even know they are truly free? Even if they are real (because alot of them are shonks), how do you know that there use at a society-wide scale wouldn't cause dangerous disruptions to the Earth's weather patterns, gravitational or magnetic fields? Do you really think that a sudden, unprecedented and widespread deployment of "free" energy devices isn't going to mess with the environment in some major way? And what about the demand that these "free" energy devices would place on hard-to-obtain resources for their construction and maintenance?

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 09, 2013

    G'day Marshall

    We would certainly do it all over again unless we learn the wisdom within our knowing. The only thing, believe it or not, stopping us from doing this is our egos, unless we stop the controlling ego controlling us we will endlessly stay in the same cycle learning very little, human history tells us this time & time again.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 09, 2013

    G'day NoetPoet

    RE: "What is clear is that we are learning all the time"

    What, learning how to devise better & quicker ways to destroy ourselves & everything around us, we haven't learnt a thing NoetPoet that's your controlling ego telling you that because that is what you want to hear. It's a typical & normal physiological human reaction.

    RE: "You can talk about fracking being unviable, but is it really any more unviable than the coal-fired power stations we rely on to keep the lights on"

    Is it viable & sustainable to keep free energy devices off the market? There was a bloke in WA (western Australia) who devised a fully functional hydro car in the early fifties going by memory. BP bought it & totally destroyed it, how many more devices have been destroyed since & before then?

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_energy38.htm

    http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=182&Itemid=60

  • marshallbarnes Dec 09, 2013

    Joseph:

    Thank you for your service...

  • marshallbarnes Dec 09, 2013

    I know that some of humanity can think its way out of extinction. No problem. It's already being worked on. What that means is that the human race will continue and not be wiped out. It does't mean that the majority of the human race won't be wiped out by whatever, or even a significant minority will survive, but "some" will. The tricky part is that not all of the survivors will be on the same page and so it may come down to an issue of do the survivors cooperate together, leave each other alone, or start the same conflict minded behavior all over again.

  • marshallbarnes Dec 09, 2013

    "Tell the poor and impoverished in America that the world is perfect. Why should they suffer and other Americans enjoy a good life? We can't give them a answer they accept" is a gross over simplification of the problem and of an answer to it. For one, the poor know the world isn't perfect. Second, the second sentence is contradictory of the first unless the poor not having a good life is part of the world's perfection. Last, the third sentence is a cop out, indicating that the position spoused is one of surrendering to what is thought to be unchangeable.

    My response then is if you're not up to the challenge, get out of the way...

  • NoetPoet Dec 08, 2013

    What is clear is that we are learning all the time, that understanding how to use things requires practical experience using them, and that this requirement for practical experience makes the whole process inherently risky. But you don't get return without risk.

    You can talk about fracking being unviable, but is it really any more unviable than the coal-fired power stations we rely on to keep the lights on, keep critical hospital machinery running, and do a million other vital and useful things which hold civilzed life together? Is it really more viable than the solar panels with their poor net energy output, their reliance on toxic rare earth metals, and the effective subsidies they get from cheap and abundant fossil fuels? Everything we do incurs costs whether financial or otherwise, no matter how pure our intentions.

    Have "free" energy devices been stifled? Perhaps, but then again there's probably 10-100 free energy charlatans and cranks for every person who *might* actually offer a legitimate free energy technology. Even if society had these "free" energy devices, what makes you think that they also wouldn't cause problems of their own. ANY activity undertaken at sufficient scale will cause problems of some sort. I've read of one Swiss Christian community which claims to have invented such a device, but refuse to share it with the rest of the world because they fear that it will be subject to widespread (ab)use!

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 08, 2013

    G'day NoetPoet

    Nothing is worth while knowing unless you are able to use it, it is plain to see we don't know how to use it so we stuff up the very thing that we rely on for our very existence & we are supposed to be talking about knowledgeable people here doing this. Too much knowledge is obviously not a good thing either.

    Is fracking viable to our well being? Not when it pollutes the underground & surface water, what happens to all the toxic waist? There are over 4000 chemical compounds found in our blood these days & it's growing day by day fracking just adds to this. It would sound that you pick financial stability over health, what have you got without your health & a world to live on?

    We are like the dark ages, we make no sense & yes we too which hunt especially any one who devises an energy free device, many have been silenced one way or the other, very little has really changed wouldn't you say!!!.

  • NoetPoet Dec 08, 2013

    (continued)

    Since when is debt an inherently bad thing, especially at the macroeconomic level? Debt comes hand-in-hand with economic growth and development. Even at the household level, debt makes it possible for people to do things that they otherwise would never be able to do like buy cars, buy houses, and start small businesses. It is not debt itself which is the issue, but how that debt is used; whether it is productive debt promoting economic dynamism and prosperity, or whether it is pathological debt which generates no positive economic or social effects and is merely used to keep people under control (typically at great cost to everyone in the long run). Non-communist countries in Western Europe were able to effectively able to use debt to recover and become even more prosperous than they had been before WW2, so much so that many of them even came to surpass the US on numerous measures of economic and social health.

    War can be profitable to those who run things - provided they are on the winning side! War can also be profitable to enterprising opportunists and to people who are in the right place at the right time, including future generations.

  • NoetPoet Dec 08, 2013

    Tyrants might go into a rage, but that doesn’t mean they’ve lost control of their emotions. Behind that rage is a steely ruthless psychopathic resolve to get one’s own way. Again their rage is their servant, not their master, and it serves to both galvanize the tyrant’s resolve and to manipulate those around them into action.
    If such tyrants truly had problems with their rage in the way that spoilt brats do, then they would have alienated too many key people to have ever risen to positions of leadership in the first place.

    Re “war didn’t end slavery”: clearly you’re not an African person living in the pre-1860’s southern United States. How do you mean that we are “slaves to the system”? What system? Don’t societal systems by definition require and demand at least some degree of conformity from society’s members? Is this not the very basis of the social contract, and therefore of civilized existence? And how enslaved can you really be anyway if you can openly write in a public forum that we are “slaves to the system” without ANY risk of reprisal or punishment for doing so?
    I also think you’re drawing a long bow by saying that we are forced to have chemo or money to exist. Chemo is a sophisticated life-saving treatment which almost certainly never would have developed in a society without currency. Moreover chemo treats a form of illness which is typically identified as a “first world illness”, meaning that people who contract it tend to have much longer and more prosperous lives than the most people who have ever walked the Earth. I’d hazard a guess that, while neither fate is even remotely desirable, dying of cancer in old age would beat dying of complications due to a mere broken leg in your early 20’s any day of the week. Money is an extension of the social contract, and quite a sophisticated and ingenious extension at that. It sure beats barter or a system of “give me what I want or I’ll pry it from your cold dead hands!”

    Actually it was the allies who declared war on Hitler when he invaded Poland. The allies declared war because they finally accepted the fact that Hilter was an aggressive bully who was never going to be truly appeased, that he would literally walk all over them if they didn’t roll up their sleeves and stop him using military force.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 08, 2013

    G'day NoetPoet

    It would seem you know little about Hitler, Mussolini or just about any past tyrant, they all go into a rage when things aren't being played their way, in other words they throw a tantrum however when things are going their way they are calculating & cold blooded mainly because they are self-centred. All war mongers are self-centred obviously.

    RE: “War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothin’’’…except ending slavery, defeating Hitler, getting the economy going ".

    War didn't end slavery NoetPoet, we are all slaves to the system, I think that's quite obvious. How much freedom do we have we one is forced to have chemo or money to exist, if you don’t have money you are left to rot because you are not supporting the system.

    Defeating Hitler is a funny example to use here; it was Hitler who declared war wasn’t it not the allies? However we have declared war on numerous other occasions.

    Economy is another funny example to use here, how in debt are we & why? NoetPoet you don’t really believe in this do you? How many European countries where in debt years after world war two, take a lucky guess?

    War is only profitable to the people who run the system.

  • NoetPoet Dec 08, 2013

    (continued)

    It is said that “a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing”. This is because people who content themselves with just a little bit of knowledge go on to derive a body of wisdom from that knowledge which is dangerously inadequate, because so many relevant unknown pieces of information have not been factored in. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” Really? Recent research suggests that a strict tit-for-tat strategy is the best in evolutionary terms. “Turn the other cheek” Are you sure? Or should that rule only apply to members of your own group, and anyway what kind of dysfunctional power dynamics could such a behavioural strategy give rise to? Is fracking really a foolish irrational thing to do? It might be from the perspective of a cosy armchair, but the cost-benefit profile of fracking looks very different to others. This also brings up the whole issue of how rational decisions at the short-term individual level can eventually prove irrational at the long-term collective level; does this make the former kind of decision any less rational? In many cases the more we know, the more cause we have to doubt the validity of our “wisdom”.

    A thousand years from now, many people will probably look back at us with resentment and contempt. But I daresay that those people will not be looking very closely or carefully. Those who do look back on us more closely will probably realise that we did what we did because it made the most sense given the available information and the inherent limitations of human perception and incentives, and if they are honest with themselves they will admit that, had it been them, they would have behaved much as we did. In fact I would not be surprised if those who look back on us with disdain end up repeating many of our own mistakes, simply because they wrote us off and therefore closed themselves off from the possibility of genuinely learning from our experiences.

  • NoetPoet Dec 08, 2013

    Actually the differences between spoilt brats and wagers of war (/ politicians) are enormous. A spoilt brat lashes out in blind impulsive fury because they are momentarily inconvenienced by not getting whatever took their whim’s fancy at the time. A wager of war plans carefully and has a very clear understanding of their tactical and longer-term strategic aims; they prepare intensively for conflict, and when the time for battle comes they conduct themselves with cold calculating efficiency. Yes they may carry on like they’re all angry and fired up, but for the most part this is done for show to psych up the pawns they send into battle. This is not to say that war wagers never fire up themselves – indeed they are likely to do so when they themselves are leading the charge on a battlefield – but even when they do they endeavour to make their anger their servant, not their master, and behind every brutal atrocity they commit is calculated plan to both instil fear in their current and would-be opponents and to impress their followers. The war wager and the spoilt brat may both use coercive techniques to get what they want, but the similarity begins and ends there.

    It is true that war has a huge cost to life and often to the economy. But then, like so many lotus flowers emerging from muck, war often leads to an array of benefits including scientific and technological advancement, economic vitalization and development (e.g. WW2 helping to end the Great Depression, Japan’s enrichment during the Korean War), great works of art and literature, enhanced exchange of goods and ideas between formerly separate parts of the world (e.g. Alexander the Great’s conquest of what would later be called the Hellenic World) a check on overpopulation, the defeat and invalidation of abhorrent ideologies, and in some cases even baptisms of fire which result in profound spiritual illumination for certain individuals. Moreover these benefits tend to compound, synergistically combine and beget further benefits over time. “War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothin’’’…except ending slavery, defeating Hitler, getting the economy going, countering overpopulation, promoting cultural exchange and advancement, bringing about life-saving and life-enhancing science and technology, and setting people on the road to spiritual enlightenment.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 02, 2013

    G'day NoetPoet

    You could also look at war as childish bickering as well which is probably closer to the truth. Parliament question time in Australia is an interesting example of this; they are just like spoilt brats bickering between themselves remembering these are the very same people who declare wars. Hitler is a good example of how a spoilt brat reacts when he gets too many toys to play with. The similarities between these people & spoilt brats are amazing.

    Yes, most of our biggest technological advancements come during war time at an extremely huge cost which isn't too economical to me plus it claims huge amount of lives, I don't think this is acceptable but some people obviously think it is.

    Yes, wisdom is created from knowledge but you don't need a huge amount of knowledge to be wise just wise with the knowledge you have. How wise today do you think we are with the use of all the knowledge we have? There is no wisdom, all we are doing is riding on the back of knowledge without wisdom to guide it, fracking's a good example of this today & stopping newer sustainable & user friendly energy devices is another.

    Knowledge needs to be always accompanied with wisdom otherwise we will keep destroying the very environment we rely on for our existence. What we are doing is obtaining all this knowledge without wisdom; no wonder the worlds in a mess. I think it’s a derrr factor wouldn’t you say, just because we think we know more where too smart to be stupid but that of course has been proven to be wrong.

    In another thousand years or so, if we survive that is, the people then will probably look at us as moronic barbarians but then again how much have we learnt from a thousand years ago? We still don’t know how to use & obtain wisdom to be able to use our knowledge wisely & in fact we are using it less by the looks of it.

  • NoetPoet Dec 02, 2013

    War is a form of competition. It is an activity which only occurs when at least one side determines that the potential benefits of war outweigh its costs and risks. War is also a powerful direct driver of scientific and technological advancement; morevoer, because scientific and technological development are inherently complex processes characterised by unintended consequences and spillover effects, war can and often does play a vital role in the genesis of knowledge and technologies that go on to provide immense benefit to humankind.

    Wisdom is meta-knowledge which emerges from knowledge: you cannot have wisdom without first having knowledge, therefore wisdom must necessarily lag behind knowledge.

  • mrmathew1963 Dec 01, 2013

    G'day IONS Staff

    I'm pretty sure this is what I was looking for.

    Good sensible & wise questions to ask. If we thought more about wisdom over technological advancements our problems would be solved in an instance but very few people are wise, even the most educated people in the world aren't necessarily wise & in fact most are using their knowing for self gain above all else.

    At the moment we are using our technological knowhow unwisely obviously only because we haven't learnt to be wise enough to use this knowing wisely believe it or not & yes it is that simple I believe. If we from the start used all our knowing wisely what would have we averted? Just about anything destructive including wars. Just imagine for a moment if we lived in an existence without wars period because we were wise enough to avert them & this is but one of many destructive things we do because we are not wise enough.

    Our knowing/knowledge has outstripped our wisdom, in other words our wisdom hasn't kept up with our knowing/knowledge so of course we will be destructive.

  • NoetPoet Jun 19, 2013

    We humans are very wasteful these days, especially in the developed world. I reckon we can avoid bringing extinction upon ourselves but it will require a combination of organisational change, technological advance, and a bit of common-sense in terms of how we live and use our resources at all levels from households to nations.

  • Joseph Smith Jun 13, 2013

    Years ago a wealthy customer of mine told me squatters had built shacks on his land. This good man built decent homes for them and let them move in for a few dollars rent. The deal was that if they paid their rent for five years he would give them the home. He said they trashed his homes and abandoned them.

    I was born ahead of my time, born in the best of circumstances. Yet at age 49, I was locked out for non-payment of rent. I was a misfit.
    This misfit ended with all his dreams coming true. How do you account for that?

  • Joseph Smith Jun 13, 2013

    Tell the poor and impoverished in America that the world is perfect. Why should they suffer and other Americans enjoy a good life? We can't give them a answer they accept.

  • bestearth Jun 11, 2013

    The world is perfect as it is...if you don't live in Somalia.

  • Joseph Smith Jun 11, 2013

    No dustproduction, were the world perfect, there would be no reason for change. Since the world consistently changes, the status quo is a paradox, the understanding of materialism and the total ignorance of all else.

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Jun 10, 2013

    RE: "There would have to be a fundamental value shift for things to change.

    Things change all the time. We are the ones the do not change. The fundamental shift is personal, individual. It happens one person at a time.
    The world is perfect as it is. It is we that do not see it, because we resist changing by not understanding our place in the material world.

  • bestearth Jun 08, 2013

    The capacity to understand causes has been lost to expediency. The quiet and sensible solutions can't be implemented without wiping out industries that employ millions. People are generally afraid to learn something totally new. They see it as injustice and not a grand opportunity.
    The education system currently turns people off knowledge. They think knowledge is a mystical achievment and not the result of reading well written well researched books and then contemplating the material. For example it's much easier to prevent illness than it is to cure it in most cases. This is what I mean by quiet and sensible. Imagine in the future people hardly get sick anymore either physically and/or mentally. All those doctors, big hospitals, cancer fraud industries, medical specialists of all kinds....out of work..what now..retrain as a space ship pilot?

    Many of these specialists have trained for more than 10 years, society regards them as la crem de la creme but if you ask them "What's your vision of the future?'" , you'd be hard pressed getting a response that has been thought about. The future is unmade, it only exists as possible timelines to many different fates to which we ride on the waves of our predominant thoughts. Individually and collectively.

    There would have to be a fundamental value shift for things to change. I am hopeful, the signs are there that good things are happening too.

  • Joseph Smith May 20, 2013

    I was born in 1925. In 1925, Congress gave the IRS authority to examine personal records for possible tax we owed. In 1974, on a fishing expedition, the IRS spent a week going through my personal records. They found that I failed to report $5,000 in taxable income. It was a lie. Of course the amount of time spent cost more than the tax money the IRS hoped to recover. It was a rouse. They knew that to legally fight them would cost far more than the tax. The agents pay was more than the tax they hoped to collect. This is demonstration of the way government thinks. On the other hand, government hands out taxpayer money illegally collected for votes. In my case, the IRS stepped in a pile of you know what. I was onto their fraud. So we will see to what extent your government will go to defang people like me.

    The IRS telephoned me to schedule an appointment to discuss the tax I allegedly owed. I informed the caller that there would be no appointment, that I'd see the IRS in court. Nothing happened to collect that alleged tax. It happened when my then wife divorced me. The IRS and my then wife discussed how to take me.

    They didn't get away with it. I filed a petition in the Tax Court. The IRS owed me far more than the phony tax. I had filed a claim for prior year business losses on which I paid tax. The IRS illegal froze my full refund, offering to pay the excess over the phony tax if I'd drop my lawsuit. That rouse didn't work. It took three years to get my case to trial. Just before the trail, the IRS sent me a check for the excess they had illegally withheld. Before the trial commenced, the IRS begged the court to be heard. They amended their claim to the amount of tax I actually owed, but left the penalty. The court removed the penalty.

    As soon as the Tax Court trial was over, the IRS reassessed me and added penalty and interest for the additional time. They lawlessly confiscated the money. In all, my case was before three U.S. District Courts, the U.S. Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. The IRS was allowed to keep the confiscated property, which violated a federal court order. I took the court record and confiscation record to The Palm Beach Post. An investigation found that the IRS had been "mistaken" from the first. Had it been a private citizen, it would have been a crime. He would have been sent to prison. Is this any way to treat someone who volunteered to fight for America's freedom? We've got the same kind of masters of deceit running America as the Germans had running Germany before and during WWII.

    We note that the newspaper revelation in my case didn't change a thing. It is the same being reported in 2013, the IRS as lawless as ever. What does that tell you?

  • Joseph Smith May 20, 2013

    Here is another WWII story. I was a volunteer. At age 18, in October 1943, I joined the U.S. Army Air Corps. I spent a year in England doing nothing. They decided to make me an officer's orderly. I let them know in no uncertain terms that I did not join to be an offer's servant. I was transferred to the infantry and sent to the front, the front at the time on the east side of the Rhine River in Germany. On my first night at the front, I was assigned to patrol the streets of a German town we'd occupied. My own troops fired at me. The Officers who wanted me for their servant, who sent me to the front, didn't have any American combat boots for me with Neoprene soles so they gave me British hobnail boots. The Germans wore hobnail boots.

    My battalion was assigned to capture Dusseldorf. City officials came to us stating that German troops had left and there would be no resistance. I was billeted at Gestapo Headquarters in Dusseldorf. I noticed in the motor pool a 1937 Ford convertible. Before the war, I drove a 1937 Ford. The keys were in the ignition. I took a tour of the city, strictly against orders. I was subject to court-martial and loss of pay for six months.

    I passed a wine cellar people had broken into and were carting away jugs of wine. I gave two German girls with a jug of wine a lift home. They invited me in to meet their family. We sat around the dining table drinking wine and hoping the war would soon end.

  • Joseph Smith May 20, 2013

    What is time and space? Someone said it's a way of separating events. I was born in the month and year, 1925, that Werner Heisenberg published his uncertainty principle, the forerunner of quantum mechanics.

    Heisenberg was Hitler's atom bomb builder. His plant, during WWII, was bombed to the ground. The United States was first with the atom bomb. I was on the high seas heading for the invasion of Japan's main island. President Truman, with the choice invading Japan or dropping the atom bomb, chose the bomb. Mine was the second troop ship to occupy Japan, The first made a beach landing.I disembarked at Yokohama. The Japanese were very nice to me. They even welcomed me. I dined with the mayor of Urawa and family. What does that tell you?

  • Joseph Smith May 20, 2013

    Some time back, I was posting my thoughts on the Gaia Community. Several moderators barred me. One moderator called me a troll. The Gaia Community went bankrupt. Tea Party Patriots barred me. The IRS is after Tea Party Patriots. They are not after me. Tea Party.org warned me to quit knocking lawyers. Tea Party.org's owner is a lawyer. All the lawyers in the DOJ could not beat me. What does that tell you?

    At Tea Party.org, I got into a long running debate with a Christian. I love debating Christians and their quaint ideas. Don't get me wrong. I believe Jesus is my savior and redeemer. It does no good to complain and do nothing. I quit posting my thoughts on Tea Party.org. The Christian has now emailed me that he missing me as his sparring partner. I'm not posting for the fun of getting my ideas out. Congress is doing enough of that. It's like a dog chasing its tail.

    I like what Jesus said in the Gospels. He told us to look within for our answers.

  • Joseph Smith May 19, 2013

    The thoughts expressed by Ion staff here have been on my mind for years. I'm not a PhD. I'm a high school graduate. In simple terms, I have my answers. They have worked for me. I'm guessing. I think my answers worked for me because I had nothing to lose. Had I have been an accredited expert, with a lot to lose, and one would not tend to wander much, perhaps something is missing.

    I'm familiar with quantum physics, the Scriptures, the law in practice, astrology, and politics. Nothing I think is new. The way I put it all together is new. I predict that we are going to think our way out of extinction, and in a way I've yet to hear at Noetic Sciences. I sense a groundswell building in my way of thinking. I've written a book and self-published it. I sent a copy to Noetic Sciences. Receipt has not been acknowledged. I'm guessing my thoughts are of no interest.

  • Anonymous Icon

    DennisTate May 19, 2013

    The last time that global temperatures rose by three degrees, ocean levels rose by 25 meters over four centuries!

    The primary factor that has up until this time protected us from significant and rapid rise in ocean levels is the fact that roughly 293 cubic miles of ice are being ADDED to the central part of Antarctica!

    If we want to protect the people of New Orleans, Florida, Bangladesh, The Maldive Islands, Holland and other low lying regions of the earth from becoming climate change refugees we need to talk about producing lots and lots and lots of food, even in the worlds desert regions! Doing this can raise the water table in nations with large deserts. Every cubic meter of water added to the water table of Australia, for example, will NOT end up on top of New Orleans!

    We also need to look at how by adding eighty or ninety trace minerals to food we might be able to radically reduce the incidence of cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes and even senility??!!

  • A I Jul 12, 2012

    I think that. How the unconcsious mind seems to work. It belives. so when we dream, it can change and without the consciosuness involved, we just belive things. SO it's greatly dependant on images from experience. Thought and reason as much as we give it weight, is not so effective per learned images.
    But, the loophole is that, self image. If we culturally, forge a global idea, through maturation of acadamia, and bleeds through to common culture, and media, that, to move from the idea or beleive we are separate from the unvierse, or plurlistic to a monistic, or seeing the world as a single event becomign a norm in self concept culturally. Tha by way of how the unconcsiosu midn works, as the will is gratetly seated there, and also defines and limits how we access our intellgience, insight and filters information, that, as the value of us and them dissolves in the mind and it's adjusted to universe is us, that how we act adn will wil fundamentallly change. The idea of family, albeit had we a child and had no memory, they be a stranger, but so the idea of family has alot to do with the fact tehy are included in the self image. Same with tribal ideas of nation, craft, profession, religion, race. So that we identify such concespt in the self image and thus treat them or will towards them differntly, how we act. We take on the will, collectively, as with nationalism.
    But so why culture is to me the most vital aspect to me, of learning.
    With the internet, a global culture can be created and identity. SOmetihng not possible before adn also, in the development of societies without mass commmunications to the level there are, civilisatons woudl develope at differnt rates. SO oyud get a somewhat beneficent civilisation adn it's woudl be sacked by a more belligerant force. SO Civilisation were often divided into settled agrarian sicueties and then wandering tribes of warriors....
    I came to realze this last year as my studies on mind blossmed alot, through reassesing basic human behavior...and I changed how I call the unconcsious mnd, to that of the beliver. The consciosu mind became sometihng of a tool for adapting when the organism hits a contigeny, so the unconcsious midn was a sort of flower or reprodctive tool, or like fingers to the hand.
    Yay. It is an opinion mind you. BUt allowed me to see there is hope....and actual chance of ending the cycle of rise and fall.
    This way, as the only way to heal the world is that ther is a collective evolution...and liek cells ina body each aprt is more self autonomus...and less dependant on centrilzation.

  • slowlygetnthar Jun 28, 2012

    If energy never ends, but just changes form, then, why would we become extinct? Let's just keep going on forever!

    *K*O*W*A*B*U*N*G*A*!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Anonymous Icon

    01interested Jun 24, 2012

    I feel a little overwhelmed even trying to express my thoughts on this. First of all, you are all extremely intelligent and express yourselves beautifully. I cannot compare with your abilities but I will express my opinion and hope I can be relevant as well. Here goes.

    I believe we are bombarded by information from so many sources that we forget what really touches our souls as truth. Going way back in time and reading the wisdom of the ancients, we will re-member who we are and what we have forgotten. We are made in the image of a higher force which, to me, says that we also embody the ability to control ourselves in a way we formerly thought only God could do. Then we need to decide between light and darkness. Read and remind ourselves of what the light means - compassion; altruism; recognizing ourselves in all; honoring ourselves, others, and the entire world as possessing the same molecules. Acting for good results. Knowing that people through-out the ages have faced, questioned, and realized the same truths we are searching for. Don't search anymore. We all have those abilities and insights. We need to put them in action. I believe that if do this we will progress further and further. Continuing to read is always good but, sometimes, the reading can confuse. Read for knowledge but keep our actions grounded in what we already know. Then let it be. When we stumble, someone or something will appear to help us get back up. And, most importantly to me, do not wait for another generation to pick up the pieces. We have the knowledge and ability now. Use it.
    Elaine Kurpiel elaine.kurpiel@gmail.com

  • Anonymous Icon

    Thedeafening Jun 12, 2012

    Perhaps, I believe so. Well whats the most popular view of the apocalypse? That is Zombies! We been making video games, movies, music videos and books for years all about flesh eating zombies. And now is It a coincidence that In Miami Florida there is a startling report about, or what we would consider a zombie? http://m.gawker.com/5917374/as-miami-zombie-laid-to-rest-autopsy-report-reveals-he-was-no-causeway-cannibal
    What do y'all have to say about this event?

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction May 29, 2012

    Our best thinking got us here?

  • Anonymous Icon

    iamonesoru May 29, 2012

    The problem is not our intellect, which is the masculine half of our human mind, but the feminine half of our mind that we call our emotional intuitive side, and some call the emotional body. Religions' repressions of the Divine Feminine aspect of what we misunderstand as "God" has caused us to assign one half of our mind to the realm of the sub-conscious, which operates below the level of the conscious "waking mind".

    We have been taught that everything good or Godly must be masculine. We have been taught to demonize, enslave, control, deny, or at least take advantage of the “weaker” sex and distort the way we see everything feminine
    .
    What if we were to come to realize that the dense part of us we call body is (usually) either masculine or feminine, but our soul is both masculine and feminine? Actually everything is energy and all energy is both masculine and feminine.

    What we call our mind is part of our soul and is both masculine and feminine, and these polarities of energy are supposed to work together to achieve a state or condition we call balance, but because of our patriarchal beliefs, they do not.

    The splitting of our ego has produced and maintained a state of imbalance we call duality because the feminine emotional intuitive half has been relegated to the realm of the sub-human sub-conscious, and our repression of our emotions and our intuitive abilities keep it trapped there as a combination of the inner child and the shadow self.

    These days we think of the mind as the intellect, and the repressed feminine as the heart. We talk about the heart, and at times we try to act from the heart, but do we ever truly think to ask ourselves what the heart is?

    Why have we been taught to ridicule and deny anything and everything either meta-physical or feminine? Why do we choose to ignore the greater part of ourselves, and focus only on the point one percent that we experience physically?

    I invite you to stop defending your beliefs, and truly contemplate this deeply, for it is a key to the shackles that bind us to the slavery of the sub-human, sub-conscious, altered ego, or what we have been taught to believe as “Satan”.

    It is a key to understanding the non-existence of our illusory fears. It is a key to understanding the fears that are generated by false beliefs meant to keep us enslaved through fear, and keep us fighting amongst ourselves because we believe that being “right’ is more important than truth or wisdom.

    Can we "think" our way out of extinction? How about we learn to "love" our way out of extinction?


  • parker Mar 29, 2012

    We may possess sufficient cognitive power to implement programs to cause extinction of some forms of life, or perhaps even all of life on this planet. But it is hard to imagine this actually happening, considering the majority must surely prefer it would not.

    We are incapable of knowing if any such "extinction" would actually extinguish life, as we do not know where the life within us originates from, nor how, or if it persists, if it is removed from us.

    Therefore to speculate on whether or not we could conceive of means to avoid that which we do not even know if we could accomplish, is a fascinating matter.

    On reading many of these discussions threads, it becomes clear that a majority of participants even in this audience, hold dearly to the very ideas that have created the potentiality of extinction. The ability to act collectively, cooperatively and collaboratively is admirable, but it is not new, nor to my knowledge, is it found properly articulated herein. The desire is discussed admirably, but the ability appears widely overlooked.

    Thinking our way to a means of preventing extinction, is an ideal that does not yet hold the power to cause the needed change, without first our being able to change ourselves individually. If we individually desire communion through a sense of community with each other, then we must first seek communion with the inner intelligence within each of us. We would then collectively be capable of virtually anything, including eliminating any possibility of our extinction.

    But most will not do this. History has also proven, most will rather wait for, or point to an expert, a guide, a guru, a "someone else" to be their teacher and their leader. Sadly, our teachers and our leaders have so far also proven incapable, or at best, incompetent.

    This propensity for most to be followers rather than collective doers, is a formidable obstacle. Until leaders choose to selflessly teach these followers the true simplicity of life, their self-imagined and otherwise misguided false-complexities will continue to instill that fear which first disables them from knowing themselves, and also from becoming an active part of their community and truly helping the collective.

    And until these followers truly sense the simplicity of life, and of what little involvement the community would really require of them, they will continue to be content with passively following the current incompetence. This choice requires no thinking, while the proper choice remains easily veiled by a great many available distractions.

    So yes, it is possible for the collective to change its thinking, possibly even to do so with the open intent of preventing extinction. First, we would need to find willing and capable teachers, and second, these would have to nurture a willingness within the masses to accept the true simplicity of life, and to thereby renew or inspire a desire to experience that life for the common goal.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Lazuleye Mar 09, 2012

    Based on reading what others think - it appears that the majority believe they themselves can think humanity out of extinction. Thinking is what created all this. Thinking about how to manage life and then acting on those thoughts.

    What's between our ears is just body tissue. It can't change the world. It can barely survive a century.

    I'm aligning with those who took a few sentences to promote loving and feeling our way out of extinction. And not being addicted to living in a body.

  • Sibylle Hajostek Mar 01, 2012

    I think we can f e e l us out of a possible black future for humanity

    HOW? By working on our beliefs, facing and clearing out our fears, insecurities and obsessive actions, by breathing in light, hope, compassion and love. So first inner work, then outer work.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 25, 2012


    I think all this doom & gloom fixation is a cop out. No, I want to scream it:

    I THINK ALL THIS DOOM & GLOOM FIXATION IS A COLOSSAL COP-OUT!!!!!!

    IT GIVES US AN EXCUSE TO FEEL POWERLESS AND BEHAVE APATHETICALLY, OR WITH RESIGNATION, THAT WE ARE HEADING FOR APOCALYPSE--THE END OF THE WORLD---IF WE DON'T CHANGE--AND THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    GET A GRIP, TAKE RESPONSIBILITY, ask WHAT CAN I DO TO BETTER THINGS IN MY WORLD RIGHT NOW, TODAY??????????!!!!!!! QUIT MOPING AROUND, WAITING FOR THE WORLD TO BLOW UP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe, instead, REMOVE THE LEAD FROM THE POSTERIOR and START DOING ANYTHING THAT WILL HELP INSTEAD OF SITTING AROUND WHINING ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Okay, I will stop yelling. This is brought to you by the sentiment that I am GAZOOOOOOed --plum full--of the folks who will not do anything because the "Mayan calendar is ending in December," so they see no point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What is the saying?: Even if I knew the world would end tomorrow, I would plant a tree today.

    Get a shovel. Get started with the tree or clean the nearest barn! GO TEAM! RAH! TISH! BOOM! BAH!

  • capt_infinity Oct 22, 2011

    Methinks we thinks too much when it comes to many matters of the mind. Less thinking more observing. Look macro using the Hubble. Look micro using the electron microscope and we see a lot of answers that have been there for a long time. Some are so obvious all one needs in a store bought telescope or microscope to see them. On this planet and in space are bacteria that can survive conditions 10000 times worse than any of us can. If we end up trashing the place so bad we cant sustain or get taken out by well placed asteroid that doesn't completely destroy this planet, life will once again evolve and human beings will once again walk upon its surface. If there is a spiritual component to our existence it is eternal and it will be waiting for us when we get back physically, Nice thing about being a spirit, no sensory organs so you are not aware of time.

    The universe is huge No doubt this experiment called life goes on in more places then we can imagine. There may be some differences like in the movie Avatar but it will be the same DNA because all DNA evolves from the same RNA and if we have spirits they are eternal and they will go elsewhere should life no longer be possible here. Not only is the Universe expanding it is accelerating doing it, which means with each passing second, there is less chaos in the Universe. That has a strong smell of intelligent design. Religions have fought over God for centuries while science quietly proves God exists.

    I see us with two options. We can keep on speculating and end up exterminating ourselves or maybe or we can keep on learning and by doing so, lessen the chances of chaos putting an end to this physical existence. If we have a spirit we can really learn how it works. If not we can really learn how the universe works and make ourselves eternal. Sounds like a win win to me.

  • frequencytuner Oct 21, 2011

    Extinction and end are synonymous, both are gateways to new beginnings. Thus is nature.

  • Saoirse Oct 10, 2011

    I'm not sure the question is so much can we think ourselves out of extinction as, can we avoid emoting ourselves into extinction? We have the intellectual capacity to solve the problems, but humans have a tendency to let emotion and instinct rule their behavior, even in matters of survival and even when they know, at an intellectual level, what needs to be done.

    From the standpoint of ethology, a lot of things are clear that humans don't like to admit to, and because they're unwilling to admit to them, those things will never change. Humans still engage in threat displays, and fight over breeding rights, territory, and dominance, the same way other species have done since complex life forms first emerged. We have the intellectual capacity to recognize these instincts and choose not to be ruled by them, but that would mean acknowledging the instinct first, rather than making excuses for it.

    We're like the scorpion in the old fable about the scorpion and the frog. The scorpion asks the frog to carry him on his back across the river. At first, the frog refuses -- he doesn't want to be stung to death by a deadly scorpion. But the scorpion says, "Why would I sting you? It would make no sense. If I did, I'd drown along with you." This logic persuades the frog, who allows the scorpion to climb on his back. But in the middle of the river, the scorpion stings the frog. As he begins to sink, the frog asks, "Why did you do that? You can't swim. Now we're both going to drown!" "I know," says the scorpion sadly, "And I'm sorry, but I couldn't help myself -- it's my nature."

  • Anonymous Icon

    typo Oct 10, 2011

    Ahh, its a good and important question.
    I spent 41 years thinkign for a solution to tribalism and the fractures that are a denouement of natural experience as a individual, that is just culture at one level. My initial conclusion was that, the problem has to do with culture and language, as the universe is language basically.
    I saw that, values derive from how we see ourselves. That, if we taught children at a very young age, merely with emphasis on one area of learning, that we are part of one event, a point in that event. But idea being, as now we are brought up as being separate from nature, and either victims or predators and trained to comare and entroduced to western merit system, which compounds the issue.
    But, were we from birth merely given the cultural viiew that we part of it, no real change in learning, just emphasis, would that change values naturally and passively, as how we interpret and see our eviorments would change....as how we saw ourselves changed....to me cultural self concept, is like firmware.
    But point being. I though this was a solution, as it allowed for no intervention to the will and would produce more self autonomy, theoretically, more social responsibility and less tribaism, and more environmental resposivness. It was the only solution after studying human learning and history. How a mysitic sees things rather than a academic. We'd be more intellgient as we'd rely more open, more tendentious to forging relationships rather than being as mechaincal and rote wonting as the system is today.
    Now. I am rethinking things.
    We are a natural event. That it might be best to just improve ourselves best we can. So much of world problems were solutions.
    That so much of human suffering is fear of suffering, the need for control.
    Why do we need any particular end? To desire is to destroy freedom as well being has alot to do with psychological autonomy and authority.
    Is the fear of self extermination the cause of self extermination and if we are not motivated by unconditional love which comes from personal freedom, then all our solutions will have the seed of fear in them and thus tain the solution.
    In that, I questioned, after 41 years of study, my answer and now work on being ok with whatevr happens and just working on embracing now and acting in now and whatever I do, I try to stay now. Then I feel when something can be done, I will have all my resources available to act on it.
    So but I guess, I was obsessed with this question all my life and came to an answer that was not unreasonable, but is it right?
    Now i see the prob is with me. I was being and egg head.
    The answer is, I don't know. In the mean time I work on me and working to be involved in my community in a positive way and teaching by example albeit I seem to be writing alot......still.
    Just my thoughts as, its been the drive of my life since 4 year old to find a solution and I have spent my life on it.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Malcolm Hollick May 21, 2011

    From the summary provided, it seems that "The Watchman's Rattle" is based on the idea that our brains are hard-wired according to genetic blueprints. But the old debate on 'nature v. nurture' provides plenty of evidence that our experiences also play a vital role in the wirinng process. This is now supported by extensive work on epigenetics. The networks of neural connections in our brains go through at least three cycles of growth followed by pruning during childhood. The connections that we use are retained and strengthened, and those that we don't use are lost. Thus, our childhood experiences play a large part in determining how we respond to the world emotionally, intellectually and behaviourally.

    In her classic book, "The Chalice and the Blade", Riane Eisler first drew attention to the cultural discontinuity that occurred at the dawn of civilization. The earlier peaceful, cooperative, 'partnership' hunter-gatherer and farming societies were replaced by the warlike, competitive 'dominator' societies that are with us still. More recently, Steve Taylor argued in "The Fall" that this discontinuity was due to an ego explosion; and James DeMeo in "Saharasia" attributed it to the trauma of desertification and the resultant conflict over shrinking resources. In our own book (Hope for Humanity: How understanding and healing trauma could solve the planetary crisis) we argue that the crisis of civilization is due to trauma - both inherited from our ancestors, and contemporary. While some people are transformed by their traumatic experiences, the majority are not, and often suffer a lifetime of physical, mental and/or emotional difficulties. We believe our violent, competitive society, and our addictions to consumerism, alcohol, drugs and foods are attributable to trauma. Until we tackle trauma, we will not be able to resolve humanity's problems.

    Having said that,even if we heal or prevent all trauma, we will not be able to think our way out of our problems by current methods. The complex and chaotic nature of reality means that it is, and will remain, impossible to reliably predict and control the behaviour of natural and cultural systems. The only way out that I can see is to abandon the mechanistic, materialist scientific worldview and move towards a way of thinking and seeing reality that integrates science and spirituality; that releases our addiction to information and balances knowledge with wisdom. I argued this case in depth in my earlier book "The Science of Oneness: A worldview for the twenty-first century."

    For further information, including extracts and summaries of our books, and a free eBook overview of our ideas see Human Solutions Now (http://www.humansolutionsnow.com/)

    In our recent book, "Hope for Humanity: How understanding and healing trauma could solve the planetary crisis", my wife and I argue that

  • cprize Apr 19, 2011

    What enabled us to move from primitive primates like Bonobos to the creative beings we are now was our use of dreams for our creativity, health and relationships, and to avoid foreseen problems and dangers. Look at the best examples of our current creativity (Einstein, Edison, Tesla, Frankin, Bell etc) and you can see how a few inspired people have pushed humanity ahead, while others simply copied their efforts (like the 100th monkey) for lesser yet worthy successes. My objective is to push humanity to far greater achievements their dreams are inspiring them to create and do. The keys to it are in books I've written. http://www.pacificway.org/printsofpeace.pdf The achievements will include changes in technology which will enable us to travel to distant solar systems, even in our lifetimes.

  • Anonymous Icon

    wolvie14 Mar 24, 2011

    I consider myself an eco-pessimist. I believe humanity might very well consume itself out of existence. If global warming goes beyond a certain point, and the wa things are doing, it might very well happen, the temperature of oceans might rise to the pnt when oceanic currents will just stop. That would create conditions that would bring the proliferation of certain marine plants that will spew toxic fumes in the atmosphere that will likely bring a massive extinction on earth.
    Still, i am making my part to try to diminish my ecological footprint . I don't think we can '' think '' our way out of this. We will also have to act on our thinking. And time is short. There are too many people unwilling to see the dangers humanity is facing, and too many people opposing actively the steps that would ensure that we don't go the way of the dinosaurs.

  • Anonymous Icon

    namuh1 Feb 23, 2011

    There is no possibility that the Human Race will become extinct unless each and every Human, ever, decides it should be so. As to 'thinking our way out....', thought is the minor part of the equation and, alone, has no effect.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Qually Feb 08, 2011

    Thoughts have energy. I know this from my own Noetic experience which divined upon me the insight that a massive, collective thought created the universe, or, in infinite multiverse theory ... all the universes. The question of "What came first? Thought or existence?" goes to the very heart of "I think, therefore I am." It is always a conundrum when ethereal noetic experience meets physical pragmatism. The very core of our nature is to take action, solve problems and institute positive change for the betterment of all and challenge elite hierarchies seeking solely to benefit themselves. I'm hoping that a framework for how best to implement 'positive thought energy' is somewhere to be found here at IONs. I just joined so I don't know. The most important axioms for such a "mind / body / spirit" road map would be how does one construct an axiom where the desire itself to construct it may be the Achilles heal?

  • frequencytuner Feb 05, 2011

    Making no choice or change is a choice or change in itself. That is all that is necessary. Let It Be.

  • frequencytuner Feb 05, 2011

    Instead of trying to change what is, we need to accept the changes that come as they come and pass no judgement on them as good or bad because it is our judgement of the change that will ultimately dictate our perception of it. Observe it, but do not try to perceive it one way or another.

    Music begins to speak where words end:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdopMqrftXs

  • KTI777 Feb 05, 2011

    Yes, we can most definitely think our way out of extinction, in fact we are being presented with the means of how to do with the divinely inspired movements like IONS and the Intention Experiement. However, intent from individuals will not be enough. For us to take the next step in evolution and take advantage of this unique point in history requires a shift in the mass consciousness, initiated by a critical mass number (777,000) of individuals changing the way they think. The Know Thyself Initiative on the triple7center web site is exactly created for this purpose, as it practically applies the Ancient Mysteries. The Ancient Mysteries have survived for thousands of years, because its proponents, the wisdom teachers knew that the Mysteries could not be fully applied until Humanity had evolved to the point where the collective subconscious had become self-aware into an awakening mass consciousness. With the development of Social Networking and the Internet we have arrived at that point. The next step is for those most aware to join together with the same simple message that each individual in the world has to choose between the status quo, which will lead to destruction and reaching for the future with endless unimagined possibilities. If this resonates with any of you please consider that you may be a member or facilitator for the Know Thyself Initiative born specifically for this moment.

  • ewaweel Jan 31, 2011

    Hi to all,

    The original question was “can we think our way out of extinction”, but who are the we? We as humans or we as a society?

    We are not on a path to survive as a society and every day, news are there to remind this to us. The reason of this is simple : true power in society lies in Money and only Money. In Gold we trust. We, as a society, would first need to implement real laws to control Capital internationally, even in fiscal paradise. I could elaborate a lot on the subject but not on this forum.

    We as humans can survive by “cultivating the power of insight” and by learning to focus on real important issues in Life. We, as humans, have the capacity to survive because yes, “the most powerful wireless computer” is indeed the human brain. Physics has taught us that parallels worlds exists and we, as humans, have a real access to these worlds.

    A new world is about to be born, but giving birth is rarely without pain and hence we, as a society, will soon experience major disasters. To the original question can we, as a society, think our way out of extinction, my answer is then yes, by leaning to think correctly, as humans.

    E.W. Aweel

  • Anonymous Icon

    karanvir singh Jan 28, 2011

    yes i think humans can avoid extinction.. we have tremendous power in our thoughts which i believe can change the outlook of our world.If we concentrate and use the power of mind effectively we can avoid extinction. the answer to this question lies in our own mind and physical world combined....

  • Fallensoul Jan 27, 2011

    Yes, we can not only think our way out of extinction, we can practically realize our way...

    The fundamental problem is that we actually think that we will become extinct. According to ancient wisdom this is a major fallacy. Rather the vedic literatures explain that: "Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, ...; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be." It is a fact that the body is sure to age, get diseased, die and take rebirth again, but when we think or identify that we are just the material body (or material mind) then we are subject to extinction. We are wired so closely with the body that we mistaken our real identity with that of the temporary body, we experience the pains and pleasures of this temporary existence, although we are actually not subject to extinction or the sufferings of this world. It is just like a man driving a car and when someone bumps into his car, he thinks "Oh, I've been hit" and experiences displeasure. Actually he has not become hurt, but because he identifies so closely with the car, he thinks now I am extinct. Our real identity however is not subject to extinction or any other suffering like disease, old-age and rebirth.

    By the process of self realization we can come to the realization, not just thinking, but practically that we a distinct spiritual entity separate from the material body...as so many people on this forum actually experience by various ways, including the founder. Then one can really experience happiness. This is the real use of our human endeavor, to come to this thinking/platform.

    And its not that it isnt scientific. Actually this truth of human DEvolution (http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/MACremo1.php?p=1) is far more noetic and closer to science and reality than the awkward human evolution theory which when you get down to it simply perpetuates the ignorance of the self.

  • RedDog Jan 20, 2011

    Questions of eschatology have often come up in all human cultures. Ours is no different. The more mystical interpretations found here, speak of the end of ordinary reality, whereas the traditional religions prophesied an actual future event which translates into an end of days.

    Beyond the mere ending of an Age, as in Mayan prophesy, the question posited here is more based upon the Doomsday argument, or Carter Catastrophe where human population cannot expand infinitely without a collapse. All kinds of extinction events on our planet with various animals, have demonstrated that simple model. Can we think our way out of something which is already underway?

    IMO, No. We do have free will, and as most members here can attest, our consciousness and collective consciousness do mold and shape this physical reality we are in for a short time.
    But time is the key. This latest human program has been running for several thousand years now and has gained momentum and direction. Think of it like a river. One with a beginning and end.
    We are trapped upon the river, flowing along in our human boats, able to change directions and even push against the current for a time, but we cannot change the path of the river. The more self aware in our cultures have looked ahead both seeing and hearing the roar of the great fall.
    We can only hope, that the fall is beyond our short lifespan.

  • Gretchen Dreisbach Jan 20, 2011

    I believe that we will LOVE our way out of extinction. When we choose to remember that we were first beings of light before we were ever dense beings of matter--trapped in this illusion which our egos and logical minds have created. Our light will never become extinguished, although expression of it may take billions of different forms, it is always and infinitely connected to its SOURCE!

  • Shiroe Jan 20, 2011

    Oddly enough, I've been debating this exact question on H+ Magazine in relation to transhuman sciences. Basically I am of the belief that humanity as a whole is going to have to attain higher consciousness in order to cope with our changing world. Human augmentation, nanotechnology, VR and genetic manipulation are soon going to become realities, and as people flock to these technologies, it is going to require a lot of soul-searching to overcome the next evolution of man, which I believe will be an intellectual and spiritual evolution in nature.

  • drquantum Jan 14, 2011

    drquantum I am dr Lynn Sereda, ph. in Ed Psych, UC Berkeley late 60's, thesis on the effects of deep relaxation and meditation on learning. I just completed a 2vol ebook go to quantumyou.com. And am about to submit a less scholarly for the mass public version - to Namaste Publications Eckhardt Tolle's publisher, entitled, 'Grow You Inner Wisdom to the Max', complete with how to illustrations by noted children's book author Amy Cordova. On how to support our nervous system to grow us into the positively beyond even our wildest dreams Brilliance's we were all designed / evolved to be. My huge thesis is that when we look to our internal operating system, there are 3 main sub operating systems, our feeling & emotional, our so called rational / logical, and our hearts, the very core central most sensitive processing unit, which allow us to integrate our nervous system into a whole field of pure whole being present - awareness. And it's all about supporting ourselves to open all of these aspects of our solution generative capacity, all at once in harmonic unison together, to the max. Which is what I do my best to reveal to people, based on '9' protocols or aspects of our greater awareness within. '3' to grow our feeling and emotional or fully awake to 'life focre' intelligence to the max; '3' to grow our rational / logical intelligence all the way up into a process we refer to as supra logical holographic, all 4 hemispheres 100% lit up all at once 'insighting', as opposed to mere 'thinking' mind alone; and '3' to fully awaken our hearts, as the most integrally sensitive means we have within us to help us, to integrate both halves of our brain together into a single whole being true found sense of brilliance. So my answer is, no we are not likely to be able to 'think' our way out of extinction, but yes we can learn to way more holographically 'insight' our way out of extinction, plus plus, plus. To the point of being enabled to manifest real prosperity and abundance, a true found sense of: 'love of life'; big mind open solution generative inventive 'liberty'; and real actualized 'happiness. The moment a significant majority of us agree to learn how to operate the whole of our full-on mobilized inner wisdom - to the max. Incidentally you can learn more about how I propose we can all do this, by going to my webtalkradio.net show and tuning into my ongoing broadcasts under the title 'Your Quantum Computer Within'. Ho! Let's get ourselves together and kick some ha new man/woman all together - butt!

  • Mindlink0 Jan 11, 2011

    A "thank you" to Neon for reminding us that changes in the quality or quantity of information cannot, by themselves, save us from extinction.

    What we need to do to think our way out of extinction, and to avoid approaching extinction ever again, is to acknowledge our own capabilities which, from my personal experience, include the ability to comprehend each other's feelings, images and intentions -- to comprehend noumena, "objects of intuition that can be apprehended by the intellect only and not by the senses" (from the Greek word 'noein', to conceive. And hence the word 'noetic').(Reference: Funk & Wagnalls Standard College Dictionary, 1963)

  • Neon1 Jan 09, 2011

    I hate this paragraph arrangement system! Someone please change it!

    To those interested in my comment, please scroll down to the last comment and read them starting from the bottom. Thank you.

  • Neon1 Jan 09, 2011

    If humanity is to survive—and yes, we must think our way out of extinction—we will have to find a way to deal with all of the exformation we are currently drowning in. We will all need to submit to a dialysis of sorts to cleanse us of all of this toxic exformation until a new liver; our ability to manage its filtration successfully comes online.

    What chance do you all have?

    Ha! Are you kidding me?

    Until today, you didn’t even have a word for the excrement that is poisoning you!

    It is not information that we are drowning in. We are drowning in exformation!

  • Neon1 Jan 09, 2011

    For example, religion is an information system designed to answer the ultimate spiritual question. The information communicated at different stages in the development and evolution of human consciousness reflected the ability of the avatars of that particular stage to communicate an answer compatible with the stage of consciousness of the general populace. From the Archaic, through the Magic, and onto the Mythic stage of consciousness, the information given matched the comprehension of the general masses at that stage of consciousness.

    Now that humans have advanced to the cognitive stage of consciousness, this information is no longer relevant. It is now EXFORMATION; obsolete information that needs to be gathered and stored (and forgotten). Those who have had a serious doubt about religion have developed many an original thought regarding it, but the memory of religious exformation is still so strong among humans that it is literally killing us with its toxins.

    For another example, it is not the information provided by Isaac Newton that needs to be stored and forgotten, it is the exformation, which he himself suggested the information pointed to. It is the mythic belief in a clockwork universe whose spring was originally wound by a mythical god, which needs to be stored and then forgotten.

    In the distant future it will not be the information provided by David Bohm that will need to be recognized as being obsolete, but it will be the mystical connections that he made to this information, because of the mystical states of consciousness he personally experienced that gave the information such a suggestive flavor. On some distant date, the exformation of quantum science will need to be stored and then forgotten.

  • Neon1 Jan 09, 2011

    “Before you can have an original thought, you must have a serious doubt”. –Leon Night

    The fact that so many people today recognize the collective dilemma we face, and appear to have so many creative solutions, suggest that we are able and willing to think our way out of extinction. These “cultural creatives” are awash with interesting new concepts, some of which reflect closely the great potential of the human spirit. We are not lacking the information we need to survive. Original thoughts are everywhere!

    What we are lacking is the ability to forget. Humanity needs to experience a stressful period of serious doubt—a crisis, which begs us to reconsider all of our individual beliefs, and to jettison our most cherished belief systems.

    Our ability to gather and store information today has become so great that we consider this the Information Age. Our inability to gather and store exformation; the unnecessary tailings of the process of learning, is lagging so far behind the former that until today your mind didn’t even have a word for it!

    One of the most interesting ideas in the book, The User Illusion by Tor Norretranders, is the ability to deal with EXFORMATION. This is the ability—the necessity—of consciousness to forget.

    The limitations of human consciousness have created many subconscious habits. One of these habits is to prune the branches of a tree of thought down into a more manageable trunk, which consciousness can then get a handle on—one which suggests the image of the original tree, but no longer contains the detail. We naturally package this image of the original information into what’s called a belief. This belief then develops into a belief system, and this belief system then propagates through the ages infecting new generations of humans with its toxic exformation.

  • Mindlink0 Jan 07, 2011

    My own life experiences and observations have indicated to me that the most powerful wireless computer to which a human will ever have access, in terms of storage capacity, processing capability, sophistication, peripheral supports and links to other computers is the one between his or her ears. Each of us is an integral part of the Natural Information System whose hardware and software comprise what we perceive as the Universe.
    The basis of an information system is the sharing and processing of information and ideas. The essential components are a Central Processing Unit (CPU) for processing information, and Communication Channels for sharing information. Peripheral systems are available for capturing, storing, retrieving and displaying various types of information. There are two kinds of information systems: Fabricated (i.e. man-made) and Natural (inborn in living entities). The astounding developments in fabricated information systems has drawn attention to parallel capabilities, capacities and portability of the Natural Information System (NIS). A cursory assessment of the NIS indicates that the quantity, quality and speed of information shared wirelessly within the Natural Information System far exceed those of any communication system ever fabricated.
    A primary reason for many people to deny and reject the concept of the NIS seems to be because we haven’t yet come up with a name for, or a means of measuring, the wireless information exchanges taking place within the system, even though many of us occasionally become aware of them. “Information exchanges between resonant quantum holograms” for a name is cumbersome and limiting. As an honors graduate in electrical engineering, I worked with the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity and with applications of electricity in telecommunications and radio broadcasting. But, beyond a few inadequate and mutually-exclusive definitions, I still don’t know what electricity is. Thank goodness we gave it a name and developed ways to measure it, otherwise we might still be in denial about its existence.
    I suggest that humans beings compulsively follow the same pattern of collapse again and again and again (Ref: Rebecca Costa: “The Watchman’s Rattle”) because we fail to acknowledge the capabilities of the human organism itself. I suggest that the rate at which the human brain can evolve creative faculties is faster, not slower, than the rate at which humans generate change and produce new information. (ibid) Having access to the accumulated and socially uncluttered knowledge and wisdom of an extra generation, my children have much greater creative abilities than did I at their age. All we need to do to think our way out of extinction, and to avoid approaching extinction ever again, is to acknowledge our own capabilities which, in my opinion, include our part of the Natural Information System.

  • or Sign Up to Add a Comment

Stay in touch with IONS