| by Frederick
Mann The following was posted to the Advanced Freedom Solutions list:
At 11:54 AM 8/20/99 -0700, desertrat@hotmail.com wrote:
I was reading "How to Become a 10% Person or Better - Part I" at
BuildFreedom.com.
I got to the part where it mentions that most animals mature automatically...
"One of the differences between humans and other animals is that we don't
automatically become mature. Most wild animals, without having to think about it or make
some special effort, attain the potential they're capable of.
"Not so, with humans."
And not so with wild animals raised by humans, at least, that is, until we learned
how the wild animals raised their offspring and put great effort into imitating them and
minimizing the offspring's reliance upon and contact with humans.
Is it possible that there is something wrong with human upbringing methods which
prevent humans from realizing their full potential in the same way that it prevents
animals raised by humans from adjusting to living in the wild?
Once an animal has been raised by humans, efforts to "re-educate" the
animal are almost hopeless, though I believe there has been some success with orangutans
raised in captivity being released in Borneo.
Is it possible that so few people realize their full potential because there is
something inherently wrong with the way humans raise their offspring?
Is it possible that at some point humans lived as wild humanoids realizing their
full potential as wild humanoids but then something changed, maybe in their brains, maybe
when they started domesticating other animals, and they started raising "tame"
humans who were no longer capable of realizing their full potential?
Is it just coincidence that one of the major steps in advancing to a higher level
of potential is to realize that "civilization" is largely imagination, that
"government" and "civilized" human society are mental blocks to the
realization of how human society is actually "organized," viz., anarchy?
In other words, society isn't really "tame," it's only the humans that
have been "tamed." Human society is actually "wild" and to realize his
(or her) full potential a human needs to re-educate himself (or herself) on how to live in
the "wild."
The "full potential" of a domesticated animal is probably 1% or less,
isn't it?
Is it possible that man was the first "domesticated" animal? That we
"domesticate" our children instead of raising them?
desertrat
Frederick Mann's response:
You may want to read Wings
of Illusion and The
Corruption of Reality by John Shumaker.
The most fundamental human problem is what I shall call the
"Unreality Imperative," which in most people is more powerful than the urge to
survive.
Shumaker uses the term "Paranormal Imperative."
He identified only part of the phenomenon: religious unreality, belief in various
superstitions, paranormal beliefs in things like "psychokinesis," hypnosis,
suggestibility, and psychological unreality."
The unreality imperative also includes dietary unreality,
political unreality, and language unreality.
The unreality imperative is the "answer" to the
problem of certain aspects of reality being too terrifying for human consciousness.
99.999...% of humans are in the grip of the unreality
imperative in major areas of their lives.
Practically all parents impose aspects of the
unreality imperative on their children. From soon after birth, they
feed their children adulterated food -- see Health Freedom & Life
Extension
. They use "unreality words" like "Santa Claus."
Shumaker distinguishes between "clinical
insanity" and "normal insanity." Clinical insanity is basically what people
get locked up for. Normal insanity is what's "culturally correct" but unreal.
Most of "culture" is a result of the unreality imperative.
For humans to achieve their full potential, just a
deliberate and conscious effort isn't enough. The effort also has to be directed at the
entire range of the unreality imperative. Such aspiring humans also have to become very
good actors, because to interact effectively with normally insane people, you often have
to pretend that you share their normal insanity. You have to use their unreal words as if
valid when communicating with them.
It would be extremely difficult for children free from the
unreality imperative to interact harmoniously with other (normally insane) children. Even
if the former could successfully pretend they're normally insane like everybody else, they
couldn't eat the adulterated food eaten by the normally insane.
At this time, I suspect there isn't even one romantic
couple in the world, with both free from the unreality imperative. The probability is very
high that no children have been brought up in a manner conducive to achieving their full
potential.
See also:
Feedback:
What did you think of this article? We'd like to hear your thoughts. (Please mention the
name of the article to which you are responding.) |
