Looks like someone gave Kevorkian access to the 'puter room…
Here’s a nice little page with some designs for “Thanatrons”
Hope you studied Craft Design Technology at school Justhink… 
Justhink, did you write that yourself or did you just copy-and-paste it from The Postmodernism Generator?
I assume ‘counter-intelligent’ means hostile to intelligence.
Normally a proposal ‘without doubt’ is pretty obvious. This one is not, at least to me.
For example, America funds a thorough School system and plenty of Universities. These are designed to both pass on knowledge and teach people how to think for themselves.
I remember reports that the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia killed people who wore glasses on the grounds they were intellectuals.
Wouldn’t that be a more counter-intelligent society?
‘Data flooding’ certainly exists through the Internet. But an educated person can select (and check) what he needs.
I have particular difficulty with your phrase ‘natural urge to leave terms open ended for corruption’.
Do you mean Americans love to change the meanings of words?
Do you mean other countries don’t?
Do you mean Americans don’t define the meanings of new words?
Do you think that words should not change their meanings over time? (And that this process is a corruption?)
including this one?
I don’t know the word ‘centrated’. Assuming it means ‘centrally concentrated’, or similar, are you implying that there are a few rich people and organisations because the population are kept in a state of confusion?
Capitalism is why US individuals get rich, not media style.
Try getting rich in Cuba!
Ah, the core of reality. Do you need an electron microscope to see it?
I found your prose fairly vague and impenetrable.
Could you provide an expansion, avoiding tautology and oxymorons, yet permitting assimilation through understanding of checkable assertations; throughout employing a sentence construct suitable for the level of consciousness of your anticipated readership?
Ah, ‘sorts’ in the sense of ‘incomprehensible’ / ‘incoherent’.
Um, people sometimes make a decision to bow out. Intelligence can’t. Neither can it make a bargain.
I like metaphorical language as much as the next carbon-based life form.
But first let us have clear meaning.
Perhaps you mean ‘Using our intelligence can offer…’
Next Capitalism, e.g. in the form of McDonalds or Coca-Cola, does not need ‘intelligence’ per se.
Multi-National Corporate Marketing provides worldwide dominance (through profits).
I was going to analyse ‘a perpetual state of purpose amongst the perpetrators’, but I just ate.
The legislation would pay for itself huh? Perhaps you meant that the necessary running costs of the proposal would be met by innate self-financing.
Where exactly is your income?
Do the people about to kill themselves have to pay? Perhaps sign a codicil leaving part of their estate to the suicide corporation?
Have you considered the potential legal problems if another heir claimed undue influence on an unsound mind, and disputed the will, or simply sued?
Even if there is a certain profit, that doesn’t make turning it down ‘insane’. Perhaps ‘financially irresponsible’ - but you don’t cover any moral objections.
To translate 'if the legislators are puzzled, tell ‘em it’s profitable.’
(I do find your use of both convoluted prose and phrases like ‘the communication barrier’ somewhat ironic.)
Well you’ve made two posts and I think they are appallingly phrased - and certainly flawed. (Does that make me intelligent?)
On the other hand, we know that successful science is not necessarily moral (e.g. germ warfare).
I think, as a teacher, there is a point in attempting to educate people who can’t express themselves properly.
That’s why I post in this thread…
Justhink:
Does your cat have a fluffly tail?
[sub]if not, are fascist American anti-intellectuals at fault?[/sub]
Apparently, Intelligence can’t offer the use of a dictionary.
I suspect that if America were to re-write its constitution with your definitions of ‘more articulate language’ and ‘transparency’ it would indicate the top of a very slippery slope towards oblivion. Forcing the citizens of the United States to read the Justhink version of the constitution would most likely increase suffering not reduce it.
And there’s no ‘Y’ in algorithm.
Justhink, are you perhaps related to Logical Phallacy?
Just wanted to drop in and note that America is full of “mechanical suicide machine[s]” only we normally refer to them as trains and bridges. That is all.
Counter-intelligence is observed by the phenomenon where an individual expresses something contrary to the implied social contract; and as a result (of violating the contract), gains the benefit of what is attributed to the expression of following that contract.
I have given an excellent example before:
“Difference does not exist”
Not even a solipsist would make this claim on behalf of the philosophy.
“I don’t believe anything at all”
Not even a nihilist would make this claim on behalf of the philosophy.
What we aknowledge, as a social contract, is that though these phrases can be uttered; they are by nature deceptive to the tools implied for communication. The perception of solipsism or the capacity to speak of nihilism are both rooted in the perception of difference; whether ‘real’ or not. We know that if you place a nihilist or solipsist into a locked cell and they begin demanding food and/or water, that they have LIED about their perception of reality. The crime is not in the lying; the crime is in taking and/or accepting material as a result of the process of speaking these phrases. There is nothing contradictory about a person just sitting there and starving to death; we can assume that they are logically consistant nihilists or solipsists. There is also nothing contradictory about someone saying these things, and yet refusing all material offers.
The violation comes from those who abuse the fundamental truth of this social contract, to recieve social or material commodities.
I am suggesting, because I’m not sure how to divulge the evidence for this in a logically consistant means; that it can be proven beyond all reasonable doubt, from the very perception of difference itself; that all gain is a result of applying misdirection of ideal.
I can prove that the only reason you know about postmodernism (or whatever), is because you have violated the social contract, which is the root of positive existential validation for yourself and all other beings on this earth.
I sincerely apologize for not being clear, where I intend to be clear. I apologise for not spelling or constructing grammar well.
Would someone mind explaining to me, why I should opt for counter-intelligent mind control to achieve in this life (either being controlled, or controlling others - both the same system); rather than exit this life? Killing people is not logical; but I’m not understanding the argument where living a life of known abuse is superior to not living at all?
We’re talking about fundamentals here. If you can call the perception of difference, and the logical application of that perception to those who violate the social contract implied from that perception “postmodern mumbo-jumbo”, I’d say you’ve strayed a bit too far from what we CAN know.
-Justhink
Humans are rationalizing creatures, not rational. The very best that we’ve been able to achieve is rife with contradictions, which, for all our philosophy, exist regardless of technology, peroid in history, or any other governing factor. I would, therefore, set out that there exists few or no human-created systems that in their existing forms are without contradictions.
As Walt Whitman once said:
Well, I’ll say this much for Justhink: he’s not mean-spirited or abrasive. Just sort of glosses over the fact that many of us think he’s a barking loon who’s off his meds and continues to not-quite-explicate himself.
A gentlemen loon, if you will. There are worse kinds on the board.
Well, I’ll say this much for Justhink: he’s not mean-spirited or abrasive. Just sort of glosses over the fact that many of us think he’s a barking loon who’s off his meds and continues to not-quite-explicate himself.
A gentlemen loon, if you will. There are worse kinds on the board.
Well, I’ll say this much for Justhink: he’s not mean-spirited or abrasive. Just sort of glosses over the fact that many of us think he’s a barking loon who’s off his meds and continues to not-quite-explicate himself.
A gentlemen loon, if you will. There are worse kinds on the board.
Doh! Double post foul.
I think we all have a pretty good idea about connectivity here =)
Assuming this message even goes through; it could be another few hours before I can try again. I’ve done multiple sends getting confused about pages that don’t display, but the message going through still.
-Justhink
Maybe if I smoked a joint the OP and subsequent posts would make sense. 
Justhink - If you truly wish to express certain ideas I would also be one to suggest using simpler words and phrasing. It’s the first step to attaining practical and efficient communications with your fellow humans.
Your current posting is akin to reading a foreign language… by any chance would your first language be something other than english?
Look at the alternative though! One can only succeed through violating the social contract. You don’t think that’s a slippery slope?!
There has to be some point where we bite the bullet so to speak and place faith in our discernment; that truth and consistancy ultimately does not make more suffering, and if it does; we gave it our best shot. We have to have the courage to step up and brave what reality is throwing right in from of us, and stop putting it off. There are things we know to be true. We know that difference permeates all of existence as the fundamental agreement. We know that discernment is a recognition of difference. We know that change is the perception of difference. We can keep piling these on, we don’t have to stay in the dark; we CHOOSE to stay in the dark.
We don’t have to tolorate an environment where all of success is anti-intellectual; counter-intelligent. I’m saying that if people are going to be stubborn on the issue, than they should provide a standardized method of ‘getting off this ship’. Nobody is required to tolorate tyranny for the sake of life, and until we actually begin operating intelligently; from ground zero, we’ll never know if its all B.S. anyways. Wouldn’t you rather know? Wouldn’t you rather try?
I completely disagree with the apologetics of the Whitman quote. I do so, because I believe it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, that they ARE apologetics. Does anyone actually want to know what’s on the other side? Does anyone want to know what a society is like, that determines punishment based on natural law; our most undeniable truths.
If someone says that they don’t believe anything exists; you sentence them to solitary confinement until they die. You sentence people to the representation of logic within the parameters of the very contract that allows humans an existentially positive validated existence! It’s putting the foot down and saying; no more logical crooks. This is where all theft starts from, this is the very source of it; we know that. er… I know that! Anyways… Looks like I have some other replies to tend to. I spread myself thin by not compartmentalizing, and jumping around without completely showing how one moves from here to there; but then again, in my mind it connects together so that one cannot exist without the other; each part requiring the full explanation of the individual parts. I’m trying to come to terms with a more concise method of compartmentalization.
aka… This is true. Ok, now that you know that and we all agree; that is actually false, here’s why. Now that we agree upon that; that was actually another lie, totally false, and this is why… NOW you understand what I’m saying…
That’s what I feel like I have to do in order to convey something.
It’s hits against one of my existential issues regarding abuse of others to communicate with them in a consentual manner. I get all flustered and depressed about it =)
-Justhink
And here I thought I was just missing a lot the first time I read the OP. I think Karellen’s got it nailed down pretty well. I’m still stumped.
Don’t put Justthink down. I have seen writing like this many times.
He has a great career ahead of him writing political speeches. Also be good at future projections for the business world.