Solution to Complex Problems

In solving problems, people look for one step solutions. We regularly search for and propose singular approaches to often very complex problems. Now this technique works sometimes, where one adjustment or change results in a useful outcome. We must recognize this is the way our mind works: looking for the most expedient, uncomplicated remedy.

Yet, many problems, particularly social problems can only be ‘fixed’ with multiple and varied approaches that depend upon changing circumstance and require adjustment over a period of years. Yet, people continue to propose one solution and often debate that their way is the correct way to make things happen. Hence, there are arguments, particularly, when the solution requires a ‘political remedy.’ People have opposing agendas and often cannot agree on which approach to use; they fear they will lose and have to give something up.

Let us take the case of gun control, or to be more specific, how to stop shooters from going into our schools with automatic weapons and killing people. While I personally think that gun control, is one technique to begin to solve this problem; the problem is far more complex and involves a much larger set of circumstances. From my perspective, it comes down to a society working on how to create better people who will not do horrible, deadly things to each other. There needs to be universal discussion and awareness that the reason for this level of harm, arises from people not being healthy and concerned about their neighbor, and treating each other like them self.

In an enlightened society, there should be many discussions and multiple approaches to making better, healthier and more complete people; people who are not frightened, mentally ill and distraught, and take out their ‘inner demons’ on others. Also in an enlightened society, there should not be a gun lobby that ridiculously takes the position that restricting the sale of automatic weapons, will not move, in some way, toward a solution of controlling school gun violence. Seems obvious, this restriction of automatic weapons is a beginning and much more work will be needed.

Yes, until we learn to raise better people and focus on this issue universally, as a society, criminals will still get guns and arms dealers will still sell guns to whoever will pay for them.

I had a boss once, who offered, when I was considering which approach to use in solving a work problem: ‘sometime it doesn’t matter what you do, but that you do something.’

Well, how about we do something with gun control: like restricting sale of automatic weapons and seriously raise a discussion on how to help raise better people, who don’t shoot each other.

From a spiritual perspective, we learn that you make a better world and a better society, by first working on yourself. Becoming the best person you can become and using your abilities to help self, and your society. This is just one example of a mindset and approach that may be required; communities are different and what works in one community may not work in another.

What is clear, if people are serious about stopping this ongoing, horrible school violence, we must intensify the discussion on how to help raise better people who don’t harm each other. Restricting availability of guns is one technique among dozens that will be required.

Criminality 101 – Adventures in the Pseudosciences

Fortunately, the First Amendment protects a range of free speech, not absolute free speech, but a variety of such notions that may annoy or otherwise disturb those who disagree. In addition, to that end, it is okay to disagree, to argue and debate a diversity of human issues, hopefully without fear of degradation or retaliation. Ideally, the interactivity ought to be imaginative, productive and conducive to problem solving. Of this, individually the intent ought to inspire creativity in become a better version of the original self. Collectively the motivation should encourage species ascendency.

However, the truth is more dangerous than the illusion. As personal liberation falters and human beings regress to primal states of emotional reactivity, the process of logical deduction defaults to emotional reactivity. There is the lingering perception that such is not always the case in post-modern American society. Frequently, feelings stifle discussion and blame overrides the facts for the selfishness of erroneous fallacies of inference. Modern discussions regress to counterproductive states of regression.

Yet, in this modernistic cult of “celebrity worship”, social media gossip interactions, and abject “political correctness”, little progress in social discourse is achieved. Many become troubled when their belief systems are challenged. Emotional drama pervades the feeble attempts to promote serious debate on timely critical issue. Hurt feelings allow for oversimplification and rationalization of intentional maladaptive inflictions. Likewise, so called “peer review” is filled with intentional safe mediocrity of safeguarding the status quo, in lieu of serious evidentiary provability specious conjecture.

In an age of news pundits highly opinionated “reporting”, as contemporary “journalism” has changed, feelings are translated into shallow assertions from fallacies of inference that foster hasty generalizations. Of which, stupidly communal interactions become “drive by” quotes that reflect the immature nature of superficial verbiage. Facts are replaced with fictions, or unsubstantiated theories, while reality takes a pause and bogus philosophies masquerade as science. In the “multi-verse” of complex criminal justice systems, public policy stumbles toward inefficiency in the pursuit of one size fits all, and therefore, much is reduced to trouble free simplicity.

Often, evidence based on scientific validation is conveniently overlooked for the immediate satiation of subjective validation. Bias colludes to condescend the very essence of critical analysis by which “feel good” speculations give credence to specious conclusions. As such and with reference to the fields of study as criminology, psychology, and sociology, one group of the hallowed speculative “trinity of academia”, logical analysis would reduce their treatment to that of pseudoscience.

Within this scheme, as some pretentious theoreticians scoff at claims of the paranormal, or the supernatural, their alleged schools of thought are not far removed from that “ghostly” realm. That is to say, as opposed to real sciences as in astronomy, not astrology, astrophysics, not metaphysics, physics and not psychics, serious evidentiary authenticity is vital. Other sciences include biology, not “biofeedback”, and chemistry as opposed to ghost hunting. Here, “pseudo” means non-unifying centralized universally accepted scientific provability that receives widespread approval as real science.

Meanwhile, in academia or in the “psychic” industrial realms that mass-produce “chemical cures” and magical “diagnoses”, the inquisitions of power plot retaliation. To the ramparts of dissent and disagreement, intolerance for tolerance schemes the counteroffensive. How dare some question the sacred doctrines of the well-entrenched status quo? Nonetheless, the provocation continues. In so doing, the accusation of pseudoscience refers to quasi, tentative, simulated, wannabe, ephemeral, questionable, and so forth. As such, it ought to be okay for others to argue against another’s theory, opinion or school of thought and challenge those viewpoints critically.

In the criminal justice systems, scientific validity is crucial. At a fundamental level, a basic question is what the evidence shows to be true or not true. Specious conjecture might be promoted to pass as “science”, but such things get challenged in court. With an adversarial system, both sides get to argue against each other. Likewise, this should hold true in academia, where alleged experts postulate various theoretical constructs. Yet, such is not always the case. Eventually, promoted by mainstream media through the vast reaches of “infotainment”, most of the public comes to believe the theories as real science. Even though speculation cannot be substantiated by serious scientific proof, like blood tests, or an x-rays, or even DNA analysis, belief spreads everywhere. In American society, the mere pretext of “expertise” passes of validation.

All too often, pretentious credentials, or celebrity status, are easily accepted without serious analysis, serious skepticism and investigative sufficiency. Forget the mere mention of actual real world experience, as anyone seemingly is passed off as an “authority”. While everyone might have an opinion, not all viewpoints are necessarily valid, as egregious fallacies become fact. Similarly, in a somewhat open society of a seemingly “democratic” (republic) configuration, much goes through the unfiltered abundance of “socio-psycho-babble” of social media. By collusive interaction, most news outlets, by regurgitation of so-called reporters, perpetuate the superficiality.

Worse yet, comes the pseudo-intellectuals. Allegedly famous personalities, gurus, celebrity “experts”, talking “head” reality shows, wealthy elitists, and a cast of many characters, who claim special insight to secret knowledge. Notorious, are Hollywood actors, most of whom never made it out of high school. You have to ask, how hard can it be to read a script someone else wrote for you? Meanwhile, as you are acting, you are taking direction from a team of filmmakers. Seriously, that is expertise?

That aside, many who have never conducted a serious investigation in the real world are quick to offer their “opinions”. As such, what do these viewpoints mean? The relevance signifies very little, it is merely one view among many. Yet, their celebrity status, wealth, and popularity play to shallow reaches of triteness. Viewpoints spatter the networks with the spin of grave fallacies of inference, whereby hurried generalizations foster dangerous public policy as to the nature of criminality.

When non-practitioners and wannabe pundits attempt intellectual claims outside their primary domain of knowledge, the desire for immediate gratification in easy answers stifles critical thinking processes. Investigative inquiry wanes toward the devolving realms stupidity. While opinions vary, scientific validation is vital to forensic analysis in the eventual efficacy of substantial proof. Views are many and public policy is affected by foolhardy efforts that stem from nebulous rhetoric that foment condescending regression. From politicians and commentators, to preachers of metaphysical dogma, what is the truth and who does one trust? In reality, no one and nothing, as serious introspection, analysis and investigation must challenge everything. Reasonable, logical and authentic critical thinking is a serious art form, and healthy skepticism is its tool. Exceptional evidentiary artifacts must support special claims.

By way of presumptuous pretexts in patternicity, to the suspicious strains of anomalous agenticity, hope springs eternal in conspiratorial conjectures. Unsubstantiated by scientific sufficiency, self-serving necessity for immediate satiation grasps simplistic solutions or superficial answers to complex behavioral issues. Quick, easy and repetitively cliché, a generic axis of theoretical constructs becomes the anecdotal acceptance of tenuous explanations. Subjective validation for cognitive bias lays claim to unscientific reductionist thinking for beliefs in pseudoscience.

Regardless, the debate goes on, from classicist accountability to positivist exceptionality. From reverberations in the pseudosciences, a number of alibis are claimed as defenses to illicit complicities. Often, from the classical perspective, an echo of skepticism asks for example, is addiction a “disease”? Since so many criminals are quick to suggest it was not their fault, they were afflicted by a “mental illness”. If so, in what sense and what is the anatomical test for a “mental disorder”? Will it show up in a blood test, a sonogram, a CAT scan, or what about an x-ray? Do alleged “mental illnesses” become readily an evident molecularity from DNA analysis?

Surely, pseudoscience has considered these probabilities of actual proof that can be show in the organic nature of materiality, right? As in real sciences, chemistry, physics and biology, the evidence can be shown to a reasonable and rational certainty of actuality. A correlation does not necessarily equate with causation. Additionally, a connection must be rendered provable by way of factuality in causation and consequence, whereby evidentiary articles are well proved beyond reasonable doubt. Outside that, everything else is speculation based on a hypothesis of guesswork that arrives at a theory.

An individual does not get the sniffles, sneeze and spread criminality, and neither does he or she catch it like a cold. Where the “mind” is a metaphor for chemical actions in the brain, it is difficult to delve deeply into that which does and does not exist. At a basic level of inquiry, a person makes his or her own choices relative to the complex realm of his or her thinking by willful premeditated intentions. From a criminal behavior standpoint, the criminal, whether on Wall Street, or Main Street, know exactly what they are doing when they harm someone else. It depends on the skill set and where the criminal operates. Some theorist suggest the idea that a certain category of criminal lacks a “conscience”, or feelings of remorse, yet criminals behave to the contrary.

Regardless, others looking in generally overlook the purposeful intentions of criminality. For the sake of alibis, excuses and illicit mitigations, many will quickly run to an assortment of conforming consensus. Erroneously constructed around a theoretical ideology outside the dynamics of scientific validation, some externality of illegitimate defense will be fomented on behalf of the perpetrator. Such socio-psychobabble has become so frequently a part of the superficial narrative in social commentary that the underlying dishonesty goes without question. Fallacies are seldom questioned, facts are ignored in favor of feelings, and bogus conjecture passes as “proof”.

As one criminological researcher lamented, in a post-modern context of collectivist collusion, thinking is skewed in the direction of the most biased perspective. For the classical criminologist, as regards human behavior, not much has changed over the last 33,000 years. In a not so untypical criminology class recently, the majority of the end of course “research projects” boasted questionable conjecture primarily based on the subjective validation of the “investigator”. Attempts to validate or otherwise cross-examine the substantive authenticity of assertions found little evidentiary substantiation. Sweeping generalizations based on the simplicity of opinion with superficial conjecture could not reach a higher standard of scientific sufficiency.

Nonetheless, depending on the behavioral perspective, competing ideologies may never merge into a unified field of definitive explanation. Caution is warranted every time a cause-effect interpretation is attempted. As bias taints and otherwise influence any conclusions to be drawn, the observer or investigator will affect his or her observation. Likewise, any attempt to claim a theoretical justification tends to fall within the scheme of insufficient oversimplification. From the classical point of view, to the positivistic assessment, all commentary, conjecture and conclusion comes down to opinion.

Unfortunately, in post-modern, pre-dystopic society, young pundits, celebrities, politicians, pseudoscientists, and so forth, often make matters trivial that are highly complex. Immediate gratification in the satiation of simplistic subjective validation hastily constructs a deterministic causality regarding maladaptive behaviors. Bold claims of “new breakthroughs” in “mind science”, or “ground breaking neuroscience discoveries”, do not easily reduce to clear-cut unassailable measures of criminality. Human motivations are personal, individualized and willful.

Facetious conjecture, based solely on the arrogance of personal opinion, no matter how learned the advocated, proves little or nothing in the harsh reality of human being. The most violent and dangerous species on Earth is the most invasive and destructive to the social and ecological evolution of the planet. Rumors, celebrity testimony, gossip and myriad appeals to polls and opinion neither support nor defend the rational authenticity of truth beyond doubt. As a hypothesis descends into the abject proclivities of human bias, as well as observational contamination, the efficacy of the theoretical substantiation falters regressively. As such, an abundance of “psychobabble” has become “truth”.

Over the last century, speculative assessment of criminality from deterministic perspectives tends to slant toward a number of excuses, or alibis, relative to mitigation in answering the “why” question. That is, “why” did he or she commit the dastardly deed? Rather than analyzing the “what” he or she did, the media, including social media, typically leap to hastily drawn conclusions, which result is irrelevant speculations. Anyone at any given time, alluding to a diversity of situations, can blame this or that and whatever for their maladaptive behaviors. Meanwhile, those who don’t know, or worse yet, those who ought know, frequently promote oversimplification of the complexity.

From “affluenza” to poverty, the evasion of accountability for the responsibility of one’s actions is conveniently blamed on deterministic externalities. The reversion to unsubstantiated conjecture gets worse when radical religious ideological, and the terrorism of its criminality, is blamed on social media. According to many, wearing a suicide vest and blowing up an entertainment venue is the result of “radicalization” that was “caused” by an online website. As such, the nonsense remains continuous. In the U.S., an entire society, the majority of which, proclaim a robotic detachment from the wholeness of the human experience. Complexity is reduced to a singularity.

Nevertheless, at the basic level of ideation, in a classical framework, there is the assumption of individuation for selectivity, in order to meet the needs of satiation for primal motivation. Such is the balancing act between “pain and pleasure”, “good and evil”, or “right versus wrong”. Being “hard wired”, having a “defect in DNA”, or possessing a “broken brain”, does not satisfy the necessary sufficiency of scientific validation. Again, real science pertains to things like biology, chemistry and physics. Pseudoscience concerns philosophies such as criminology, psychology and sociology.

Remedies Against Police Harassment

Police is a vital and prominent part of the justice administration system which is accountable for the protection of people and property in addition to investigation of the crimes and helping put the perpetrators behind bars.

In our day to day life, if we are observant enough we see the police committing certain legit actions but on the other hand there are a few actions of the police that raise eyebrows and we are left wondering whether they are acting within the ambit of law or not, however most of the times we never care to find out.

The legal actions that a police officer is designated with, is contained under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and where the officer goes beyond his/her power, read on to find out how you can fight this harassment.

The remedies available to a victim of harassment by the police are as follows –

i. An FIR can be filed by you against the officer in question at any Police Station;

ii. Mostly the Police try to protect their own and refuse to register a complaint/FIR in that case you can send your written complaint to the District Superintendent of Police;

iii. If the above 2 remedies fail, you can go to the Magistrate and get your complaint registered who will then order the police to register the FIR;

iv. You can also send the complaint to the National or State Human Rights Commission;

v. PCA (Police Complaint Authority)

In 2006, the Supreme Court directed to set up a PCA at State as well District level which would investigate into the complaints against police officers either ‘suo-motu’ or on receipt of a complaint filed by the victim or by a friend or family member on the victim’s behalf or any person who witnessed the alleged occurrence.

This setting up of State and District PCA s are aimed at making the complaint mechanism easily accessible to all. A state PCA would entertain complaints against the officers of and above the post of the SP whereas District PCAs will entertain complaints against and below the post of the Deputy Superintendent of Police.

The complaint can be made in cases where as the consequence of an act or omission by a police officer there is a death; or grievous hurt; or rape while in police custody, in addition to extortion; illegal land/House possession by a police officer; and any event where there is a serious abuse of authority by a police officer.

In order to file a complaint you need to get in touch with the PCA and ask them if they want the complain in any prescribed format, if not then you can file the complaint in any format mentioning your details like your name, address, contact number, etc. as well as all the material particulars of the incident in question like the date of the incident, detailed account, police officer in question, whether there was any damage to person or property, etc. the complaint can be sent by registered post and can also be submitted personally at the PCA office.

Additional particulars like photographs of injuries can also be attached with the complaint and always make sure you keep a copy of the complaint with yourself.

Mark of the Beast of Myth, Magic and Metaphor

A fascinating means of expression culminates in symbolic representation of meaningful considerations. The phrase “mark of the beast” is the method by which such metaphorical implications are amplified regarding particular societal issues. From a non-literal perspective, cooperatively interlaced with a classical view of criminality, the inference of ancient “branding” or “marking” is taken to reflect the essence of human nature. Some might argue allegorical images related to good and evil, while others might speculate on a range of deterministic precursors of one sort or another.

Among writers, and in particular movie producers and directors, there are those who thrive upon such “revelatory” depictions of the mark of the beast, and of course, the numbers “666”. Naturally, those of a more stringent strain of religious ideology will be provoked into expressing all manner of literalism. As a side note however, a few writers get a little annoyed with recent movie adaptations in which humans, usually a lone priest, battles demonic forces with little or no help from all-powerful celestial deities.

For heaven sakes, for the time being, maybe it is better to focus on the symbolism, and the relative connection to human nature. Naturally, no one has all the answers, nor does anyone understand the true inner workings of human thinking. Therefore, we speculate from philosophical viewpoints, sometimes called schools of thought. Absent solid scientific evidence regarding the definitive essentiality of causation, the cause-effect consequences of thinking processes are largely a mystery.

Yet, from supernatural ideologies, insert religion here, to atheistic perceptions, there are wide variations as to the historic the “why question”, as to why someone does a certain thing. Particularly, in the aftermath of a horrendous human instigated catastrophe, like a terrorist incident, pundits and politicians rush to hasty generalizations. Likewise, a scared and ignorant populace whimpers in fearful anticipation of some mystic revelation. Those who have understanding quietly assess from a rationally intuitive distance because of thoughtful analysis. However, many want a simplistic supernatural or other downright stupid interpretation to escape the ravages of higher thinking. And so, the connection here relates to the symbolic measure, given a thought provoking experience, whereby critical analysis is required but metaphorical response suffices.

As such, storytelling is fun and ancient history is replete with myriad story tales, super hero sagas and picture talking that attempt to explain human experiences. Even though in post-modern American culture the average person suffers a creativity deficit, some can still tell stories in very inventive ways. As the human species pursues a closer regressive relationship with self-deceit, and a parasitic and symbiotic fixation with gluttonous materiality, counterproductive choices lesson the capacity for enlightenment, wisdom and advancement of humanity. So-called civilization is doomed to collapse. The result is that myth, magic and mysticism of magical thinking replaces rationality.

Unfortunately, in support of such claim, a variety of commentary and research suggests a dismal post-modern predicament of a looming dystopic future. That is, imagination is seriously undersupplied in modern western societies. From asinine and superfluous television series, to hastily manufactured movie remakes, intellectual efforts appear woefully diminished. In actuality, emerging research asserts an alarming decline is “I.Q.” scores over the past few decades. Some investigators say the drop is as much as 20 points on standardized testing, follow by associative analysis.

For some observers of social processes, a few agree that warning signs of communal regression across a broad spectrum of society is becoming more evident. The growth of stupidity in a wide variety of topics, from economics to politics, strains the senses on a daily basis. Alleged news reporting, with in-depth analysis and learned commentary, often default to emotional reactivity. Fromm such anti-intellectual antics, superstition tainted by supernatural allegory, supported by pseudoscience redefine frightening biases that lead to tyranny and oppression of free thought.

Ideological extremism perverts the very notion of intellectual ascendency, and the deconstruction of well-defined attempts to ensure evidentiary sufficiency. The “edutainment” and “infotainment” conglomerates perpetrate the juvenile psychobabble of increasing anti-thinking that fosters the decline of rational scholarly efforts. Instead, logical storytelling with thought provoking implications, or serious morality tale, becomes the shallow and trivial never-ending sitcom, soup opera, or “drama” series that never seems to end. Incessant remakes regurgitate the repetitive deceptions to market and sell consumer comforts in order to escape the reality of the real world. With technology, serious “role play”, or acting is not necessary, as 3D replaces real people.

Meanwhile, as techno inventiveness expands by the effort of a creative few, the vast majority relishes in the instant gratification of surreal replications. An information ocean washes over and around an eagerly consumptive public. By way of the man outlets of “infotainment”, “infomercials”, and “info-panaceas” for everything, not much critical thinking is rigorously required. The allegory for the “mark of the beast” is an appellation to “anti-thinking” in a greedily rapacious “info-age”. With all the information is supplied and little skeptical analysis required, gullibility replaces reality. With unsubstantiated appeals to “authority”, as though anecdotal references demonstrated credible evidence, trouble free acceptance acquiesces to disaster on a global scale.

Back on the movie set, or television drama, simplicity subverts the deeper inquisitiveness of enlightened ascendency. For commercialized gratifications, stories get shallower, acting becomes strained and redundant, while writing devolves to the lowest common denominator. Dumbing down hastens social regression and quickens societal collapse. Add to that, silly simplistic mass appeal of alleged “reality” shows, the pretentiousness of “talent discovery”, the foolish conjecture of “talk shows”, and it seems there is much uninformed acquiescence to intentional ignorance.

Another aspect of the mythical allusion to the “mark of the beast” is intentional stupidity, which portends serious devolving consequences. By folly, futility and foolishness, grownups act in childish ways, stuck in a time warp of former “high school” revelry. Such is the mark or brand of immaturity. By the briefest of definitions, stupidity infers a general lack of maturity in intelligence or common sense application of reason. Rationality is shunned and emotional reactivity, based on faulty and unsubstantiated data, rushes to hasty generalizations that result in erroneous results.

Belief systems, which devolve to primal purposes for perpetration of illicit illusions, based on mythic tales, absent sufficiency of evidentiary artifacts, lend to human regression. In effect, the gross distortions of morality tales lessen the potentiality of construct redress for authentic application of ethical expressions. As one example, the pretentious academician, with higher degree papers, who intellectually ought to know better, fosters a disingenuous perspective given to the magical thinking of his or her religious insistence. Claims of personal interest and individual intercession on the part of gods and goddesses deconstruct the logical necessity of cerebral ascension.

From the basis of cognitive bias, for the primal satiation of subjective validation, the human species seems bent on bringing about its eventual demise. By extinction, following chaotic and dystopic consequences, some infer the end will be extremely violent. As such, the “mark beast” is emblematic, a figure of speech conjuring the sharp distinction of regressive purposes that underscore devolving status for the human species. From the illusions of literal dogmatism, particularly supernatural, occult and extreme mythical perversions, regressive belief systems hasten the destruction.

Such thinking translates into willful premeditated actions that have maladaptive consequences. Frequently, across the wide expanse of the social spectrum, the condescending nature degenerates into the negativity of counterproductive interactions. By purposeful intention, many become what they revolt against, blame others and indulge a range of self-gratifications that negate the necessity of self-evolution. At the top of the socio-economic strata, rapacious privileged elite, a small but deadly percentage, succeed in the arrogance of self-righteousness at the expense of others.

The “branding”, whether grotesquely excessive commercialization, or herded labeling stereotype, fosters the furtherance of scapegoating persecutions. A commercial in every video clip, and a drug “remedy” for every ailment, invades the senses at each broadcast opportunity. In the schemes of the “psycho-medico-pharmaceutical” commercial complex, a “mental diagnosis” must have a manufactured chemical to “cure” it. Hope springs eternal in the sacrilege of anti-intellectualism and shunning of scientific methodology. Celebrity worship, guru occultism and hasty generalizations overshadow proof, evidence and the certainty of truth in mainstream interactivity.

As life scares for all the defenses the weaknesses protest, death snares more quickly the finality of a no win contest. In the interwoven folly of psychosexual immaturity, the pervasive zeal for self-affirmation turns deadly and regressive. For herding, branding and foolish discontent, the lingering self-imposed frailties devolve to the baser spheres of selfish adoration. The futile debasement of collective extremist ideologies in suppression of individuality, imposing the oppression of conformity, foments counterproductive and devolutional processes, which hasten the final demise. Stupidity in social discourse is but one sign of pervasive tendencies to avoid the necessity of exceptional growth, maturity and enlightened progression. In the end, a number is just a number.

Nonetheless, of myth, magic and metaphor in primal thinking, that is to say “anti-thinking” is reference to that which erodes the future prospects of human civilization rising to higher realms. In other words, so long as superstitions, and flirtations with the supernatural prevail, the human species will likely regress. Whereas science, the scientific method, and evidence-based inquiry rely on proof, which should reflect the validation needed for a court of law, fallacies bias the applications of logic and reason.

In the modern age throughout the world, the vast majority of humankind rely on their metaphysical or religious belief systems to explain human existence. As to so-called developed countries, as in western societies, long after the “dark ages”, a healthy sense of skepticism and thoughtful cynicism ought to withstand competition with devolving challenges of the occult. Nonetheless, a number of surveys and studies show dismal statistics relative to the level of scientific literacy throughout the world. From cradle to grave, by whatever means of social assimilation, people demonstrate a diversity of bizarre and strange beliefs. Over the centuries, little progress has occurred.

Instead, ideological extremes and selfish viewpoints foment war, allow poverty, pestilence, famine, and socio-economic disparity. Not to mention of course, there is as exploitation of planetary resources. From several perspectives of viewing the world, many squander the precious nature of time in favor of faithful illusions and superstitious fixations. Many people would prefer to avoid rigorously applying the rationality of logical processes of deduction, backed by skilled observation and evidentiary factors. One can take pause to study or otherwise witness any human activity, and assess the range of beliefs that might be employed. Emotional instability can become extreme.

Given the growing propensity of that which some call “infantile narcissism”, according to at least one social commentator, reactive emotionalism replaces reasoned analysis. Regardless of belief system, or faithful adherence to a particular doctrine, some might agree and otherwise conclude, the human species is notoriously corrupt, dishonest and prone to vile behaviors. Not much has changed in several thousand years, in spite of valiant efforts by a few. Symbolic meanings, along with hastily contrived fallacies of inference, suggest false notions and misdirection regarding factuality. Species assertions within the nebulous context of self-validation suffer the malady of disingenuous conjecture. Failing to enlighten to wiser realms invites devolving stupidity.

The figurative “mark of humanness”, is the mirrored depiction of human nature. Such is the selfishness of people in the myriad ways “evil” is perpetrated against others. From gluttonous consumptive exploitation, to terroristic tortures and murderous warfare, the degradations know no limits. The foolhardiness of fraud and fakery, for instance, is now more than ever a constant bombardment in every venue of media promotion. Shameless con artistry flashes endlessly from cell phone to gas pump. Among the collective illusions purposely perpetrated by humans is the pressure to consume more and more.

In the dishonor by the many deceptions, motivational impetus to seek transformation to higher levels of productive differentiation become less and less positive objectives. As to the intentional degradation of others, cruelty continues as classic human history. No matter the faith or the forum of belief, whatever one chooses is freely selected and willfully accepted for enrichment of individual personal proclivity.

Regardless of viewpoint or doctrine, each in American society gets to believe whatever they so desire. Yet, from a diversity of dogma, mean-spirited inflictions promote the selfishness of one exclusivity over another. Tolerance in post-modern society hides behind a mask of intolerance if one disagrees with another. Freedom of expression slowly devolves to self-appointed “thought police” across the spectrum of social media. In cyberspace, many try; some succeed in silencing others because one sense of conformity does not concur with an opposing perspective.

From verbal admonishment by the self-righteous ignorant arrogance of a variety internet media, to the machinations of governmental intrigue, the species devolves toward the looming specter of eventual demise. While the truth, or many truths, are thought to be free, the reality of human behavior, and its associated transgressions, is often harsh when faced openly and without inhibition. In the perspective presented here, the representation of the “mark of the beast” is about the malevolent nature of people.

Moreover, it is the horrors they do to each other, the malice aforethought for premeditated harm and destruction. Such is especially symbolic of the untruthful, fraudulent and destructive acts people commit everyday as they oppose personal authenticity. Failure to self-evolve, to become more enlightened and advance the species, and accept responsibility for all actions, without excuse, invites extinction. Accountability by courageous responsibility is a mark frequently shunned.

Security Challenges in Nigeria: Matters Arising

Nigeria is currently facing serious internal security challenges, the most serious ones being the Boko Haram insurgency in the north-eastern states of Borno, Yobe and Adamawa; and the Niger Delta militancy and piracy in the south-south geopolitical zone, comprising Bayelsa, Delta and Rivers states. Additionally, there are security challenges posed by violent crimes, ethno-religious conflicts, resource-based conflicts, trans-border criminal activities, and election-induced violence. All these security challenges undoubtedly pose some threats to the social, economic and political stability of not only Nigeria, but also extending to the West African sub-region, where more than half of the population comes from Nigeria. This can as well be improved upon.

Currently, the most serious security threats in Nigeria are those in the category of discontent or separatist agenda, specifically the violent extremism of Boko Haram and the violent militancy in the Niger Delta. While the former uses religion as its platform, employing such tactics as suicide bombing, organized attacks on police and military installations, terrorizing rural communities, kidnapping of secondary school students etc; the latter is resource-based, and uses the control of oil found in its domain as its platform, knowing that about 90 percent of Nigeria’s revenue comes from that natural resource.

The most existential threat to Nigeria’s national security is the violent extremism being unleashed by the Boko Haram group which has its main base in the north-east. Although the Niger Delta militant groups were the first to use improvised explosive devices (IEDs) for their operations, the idea of suicide bombing was introduced into Nigeria by the Boko Haram violent extremists.

Honing this down to our nation’s political atmosphere, where elections are becoming a “do or die” affair, with most politicians becoming very militant in their approach. It has reached a stage where those seeking political offices aim by all means to control the economic resources meant for the citizens towards their own political interest, especially the governorship candidates who create armies of political thugs whom they not only arm with dangerous weapons, but also provide with illicit drugs in order to protect their interests even if it requires using violence. It is a well-known fact that the formation of the militant groups in the Niger Delta area and the Boko Haram sect in the north-east were at one time or another, part of the army of political thugs formed by certain gubernatorial candidates and politicians alike in the Niger Delta area and Borno State, respectively.


Freedom of Speech Issues in “The Crucible”

I find it hard to believe, we here in Canada and the USA, would ever have to worry about losing our right to free speech. But it is coming, and it is coming to fast for my comfort. Those that are running things, have been slowly taking away our rights to free speech, through the use of subliminal methods. Convincing a large part of the population that certain speech has to be controlled and suppressed for the public good.

A good example of this suppression, I were to write, that I have found a cure for cancer, and that the cure is a substance found in nature called vitamin B17, laetrile or amygdalin. And that this substance is found in raw nuts and the pips of many fruits, particularly apricot pips or kernels. I would be breaking the law. I am by law suppose to say something to the effect that this is just my opinion, and that you should consult, with your Family doctor.

The truth is your doctor doesn’t know anything about medicine, except how to diagnose your problem, and write you a prescription for the chemical formula, to further the coppers of big Pharma. The people that run this world are very wealthy and plan on keeping it that way.

They own the pharmaceutical companies, the media, energy, and utilities. They don’t want anything, getting in the way of their money-making. They don’t like people letting things out that will cure you of something like cancer. Cancer is a huge business making the super-rich around the globe billions of dollars. They sure as hell don’t want a cure for it. Well, there is a lot more than just cancer cures involved with this deception.

So how do you keep things like a cure for cancer quite? You start by shutting people like me up. They tell the population, don’t listen to people that talk crazy talk, like cures for cancer. So they have their puppet politicians draft up laws requiring me to lie, saying that this cure, I’m talking about is not a cure, and is unproven, that you need to consult with your doctor.

Do you feel that you are mentally incompetent, and that need other people to decide what is safe for you to read and believe? In all probability, your handlers are probably right, and you shouldn’t read this.

On the other hand, if you feel that you are competent enough to decide for yourself what is OK for you to read and what is not. And you don’t need someone else to help you make this choice. My congratulations to you, because are a rare person in today’s society, that has enough mentality left to think for yourself.

I do admit to making medical claims and declaring cures, in this post. I also claim that there are a bunch of very spiritually lacking individuals that have lost their way to the father. These people are running our world and tell the world governments what to do and say. I claim to love my fellow man, this includes the misguided people that run this world, and are following the lies of Lucifer. all human beings are my brothers and sisters. I want to save you all from enslavement from the lies and deception. I do not, and will not retract anything I say. I am a firm believer in the freedom of speech.

I plan to exercise the freedom of speech to it’s fullest extent, no matter, who’s pocketbook it might hurt. I love the truth, and I hate secrets, for those that fear the truth, may God help you to feel differently. Some of the information I reveal in this post, I received through the Holy Spirit, and will not recant in any way.

When I think about disclaimers. I have to ask myself, what are they for? Some say, disclaimers are to protect the reader from possible false claims, that could harm the reader, that takes them to heart. I have my own little theory on this.

I believe that disclaimers are a means of controlling free speech, and telling the masses it is for their protection. Because the reader may not be competent enough to be able to determine what is safe or not, to be able to make their own choices.

I have to wonder about that statement about protecting the reader from possible false claims. Are authors required to make disclaimers to protect the reader, because the reader lacks the intellectual capacity to discern how accurate some of the statements may, or may not be in a publication?

Am I as a writer to assume that my reader lacks the ability to judge for themselves? And that the reader lacks the capacity to discern what information they should accept as accurate because someone else has decided that the reader hasn’t the ability to do this for themselves.

Doesn’t this seem a bit like big brother knows best? Especially when it might be in big bothers best interest for things to be kept in the dark. Well, my answer to big brother is this. I am an adult, and I am old enough to decide what I want to read and what I want to believe. And I am sure most of my readers, are also quite capable of making these simple choices without your intervention.

The trouble with today’s society is that we have a small group of special interest, making decisions for other people. People that are quite capable of making decisions for themselves. To make matters worse we have a certain part of the population, that is to busy to be bothered with basic decision making.

It is so much easier to have someone else do this for them. The danger in all this is, can you trust that those people that are looking after your every decision, to look after your best interest.

I remember as a child, sitting in class room, listening to the teacher telling us how fortunate we all were living in a country like Canada. She went on to tell us that in Communist countries like Russia, the people had their lives completely controlled by the government.

How every aspect of their lives was dictated and controlled, how they had no freedoms. How they had no freedom of speech, no freedom of religion. When I look at this country and the United States today, I think things have gotten just as bad here if not worse.

In the event that you are no longer able to find my post here, just look for “Little Moses” I will be spreading this all over the net and any other medium I can think of.

Preaching Against Crime

In our times, many people would tell us to do all the right things, to do good deeds, and so on and so forth; many others pray or would pray or may be thinking of praying and beseeching on the ground of faith and hope somewhere along their lives; still many others help or would help the poor or thinking of helping them somewhere along their lives. Conversely, there seems to be only a very few who ask or would ask or might be thinking of asking people – somewhere along their lives – not to commit crime, not to do ill to others, not to engage in bad deeds and/or unethical activities; the reason being most of us commit crimes ourselves or are engaged in this or that kind of bad deed or, let us say, unethical activities.

The most significant problem of our time is this that although we are doing many good things, at the same time we are also doing many bad things. We need people who will identify and make a list of major offenses against humanity, and inspire others not to commit them. We need people who will identify and make a list of prevailing crimes, ill-doings, and bad-deeds; and inspire others to stay away from them.

It may be the case that only a few among us who are truly sincere, honest, pious, and noble are capable and qualified to embark on this most significant venture. The rest of us may not possess the morale that is so essential for this purpose. In any case, we can at least make a conscious, joint, and organized effort to boost our morale and become capable and qualified for this? Under proper guidance, those who have a good soul can probably reach up to such height; because, what one needs for a really good harvest is a really fertile land. A piece of fertile land may be full of weed, serpents, and cactus because of persistent neglect; but if one clears the land of all these unwanted things before sowing the desired seeds, one can hope for a really good yield.

We need clubs and leagues where regular discussions and debates will be held on the ways and means to inspire people not to commit crimes. In short, we need serious, comprehensive, and extensive ‘organizational effort’ to make others less likely to commit crime, led by people who are worthy of such noble venture. And these people must really be honest, sincere, and noble; who will work in groups to this end.

It is easy for the media to inspire people to get engaged in good, benevolent acts and discourage them to commit crime as they are able to reach a significant number of people. With the help of documentaries, case studies, real-life stories, movies, dramas, and other types of programs, media can play a significant role in inspiring people not to commit crime; first of all, by showing clearly the bad things that could happen to any individual engaged in crime. In other words, media can show in great detail the numerous benefits of quitting crime and bad deeds. This would provide people with good and real reasons for quitting crime.

These programs will pave the way for rehabilitation of the criminals and ill-doers, while creating a greater social consensus against crime and anti-social activities. On the other hand, it is not only a bad, but also a harmful practice for the media to show and/or describe a crime in detail. By reading such detail, those who didn’t know how to commit the crime would come to know it; and, at least, few among them may want to try it. For, such practices would let people know the ways and means of committing the crime, in turn, would encourage those with criminal minds to commit the same.

Why is it so important to inspire people not to commit crime and bad deed? Because, when an individual is habituated in committing crimes and bad deeds, his capacity to do the right things and good deeds diminishes and eventually he becomes utterly incapable of any good deed. So, to make his mind receptive to good and noble guidance; he, first of all, needs to be convinced that whatever he is doing is not the right thing to do and, thereby, he must redeem himself so that he is able to receive the things that are good, noble, and beneficial for himself and the society.

Benefits and Uses of a Lie Detector

You may have seen the demonstration of lie detectors in movies. These devices are used in order to extract the truth from the lying witnesses. The wire of the devices makes a connection between the lie detector and the person being tested. The machine draws lines on the paper to help the professional determine if the person is lying or telling the truth.

According to the latest studies, the accuracy of a lie detector varies between 70% and 95%. Let’s now take a look at some of the benefits offered by this machine.

Benefits and Usage

Since lie detector tests are quite popular, more and more people are beginning to use them. Nowadays, they are being used for social research projects.

Often, lie detectors can have an impact on the way the subject gives answers to the questions. While they are not used solely to find out the truth, they do help record changes in the physiological indices of the subject. So, the experiments are done in combination with before and after interview tests.

It’s important to note that some companies also use polygraph tests. The tests are done in order to screen potential personnel.

Another common use of the devices involves the assessment of the statements given by the witnesses and suspects. Often, they are used by lawyers, police offices, and prosecutors. Moreover, law enforcement agencies also use them to monitor the post-conviction offenders. However, it’s important to note that the machines are not used to determine if the subject is really guilty.

It’s interesting to note that toy lie detectors are also quite popular among kids. Interestingly enough, these toys are based on similar algorithm and may give a mild electric shock to the subject if he tells a lie. However, it is important to remember that the results may not be accurate.

Negative Remarks

Polygraph tests are quite popular, but the results of these tests can’t be accurate. The reason is that not everyone will give the same reaction in a situation. Therefore, the physiological indices of a person may be different from another test subject. That’s the reason this device is not considered 100% reliable.

Also, polygraph tests are not worth it. The machine may give misleading results. While the authorities will be busy proving that the subject is guilty, the real culprit may go out of the reach. As a result, they have to do the test all over again, which will take a good deal of extra time.

Moreover, the tests can cost a great deal of money. Apart from the price tag of the machine, it will cost additional money to hire a qualified professional for the interpretation of the test results.


Generally, lie detector tests provide good results as far as the assessment of the subject’s honesty is concerned. So, authorities and companies can make use of them to conduct important investigations. In addition, for social events, these devices provide a good deal of entertainment. therefore, it’s safe to say that the machines are quite helpful.

Remembering Martin Luther King’s Assassination 50 Years Ago

Race Relations: Are We Smarter Than 8th Graders?

April 4, 1968 had been a good day for me. My eighth-grade school year was winding down, the sun was staying up later, and my friends and I played basketball at an asphalt court til our moms made us come home. We lived in Union County, Kentucky, about four or five hours from Memphis, and it was already warm.

It was a racially diverse staff housing area a few miles outside the town, and none of us were locals. Our parents worked at a nearby federal facility, part of President Johnson’s “Great Society.” We had more in common with neighbors of a different race than we had with local townspeople of our own hue.

Then April 5 dawned and, over pop tarts, we watched television reports that Martin Luther King Jr. had been shot down on a Lorraine Motel balcony, and that St. Joseph’s Hospital doctors had pronounced him dead at age 39.

I’d been to Memphis a few times, but only in transit. The first time, my grandfather had to shoo me off the colored water fountain at the train station. He didn’t want any problems with local (white Democrat) authorities.

We were traveling during Spring Break on a train that ran from Chicago to Louisiana. We almost had the train to ourselves southbound. But on our way north, it was stuffed with Black women and children. It was part of “the great migration” from the Cotton South to northern cities, Chicago in this case. Many of them smelled bad, in need of a shower. Their grooming was minimal during a time when people dressed up to travel. Some brought their clothes in grocery sacks instead of suitcases.

I thought they were too poor to buy luggage, but I saw on a documentary years later that some of them had to sneak onto the northbound trains in the middle of the night, slipping past patrols employed by white landowners who wanted to stop the hemorrhage of cheap agricultural labor from the Delta country. Maybe those brown paper sacks were part of the subterfuge.

Even at age 10, I could tell that some of the Black mothers looked scared when they got on the northbound train. The grievances were not imaginary in the time of Martin Luther King. Oppression was real.

It was a dark and gloomy ride to town April 5 on the school bus. I didn’t know what to say to the Black kids. I’m not sure, even now, what I could have said. The other white kids didn’t say anything, either. The bus delivered us to the Junior High School curb in silence.

But during the school day, we reverted to tribe. I felt that my Black neighbors became hostile to us under the influence of the Black locals, who had a chip on their collective shoulder. There was some bad history in town. The schools had desegregated only a year before we moved there.

Kentucky was, after all, part of the South. Whoever won the Democratic nomination in the 1st Congressional District would coast to Washington DC unopposed in the general election. The county newspaper of record carried some very snide, dismissive commentary on the Civil Rights movement.

On the bus ride home from town that Friday afternoon, the Black kids stayed hostile to us, their neighbors and teammates. There were provocations, there were fights, the bus driver had his hands full.

We white kids were no saints, either. Nobody would have mistaken me for Fred Rogers. I said the kind of mean stuff that the white kids in town said, and that their fathers and grandfathers had said. It was the only time in my life that I used the N-word against another human being. And they were my friends.

After a parting skirmish at the bus stop, we separated into white and Black and went home to scheme the next showdown. We fumed and cursed, and vowed to put them in their place. They probably planned similar comeuppance for us.

But when Saturday rolled around, the grass was green and the ballgames beckoned. The sun would rise and set whether we went outside and played ball or not. The arithmetic was unyielding: we couldn’t get a game going without both races. I don’t remember who went to whose door to call us (or them) outside to play. But outdoor play reigned supreme, and it transcended racial animosity that day, and from then on.

We resumed our friendships as if nothing had happened, and we never mentioned that day again, so far as I know. I think the unspoken consensus was “wow, that sucked. Let’s not do that anymore.”

He Wasn’t That Bad Before He Went to Prison, But He Came Home With Even More Issues

It’s quite interesting how a person can leave prison with issues that were non-existent prior to incarceration. It would not be a total surprise that after a period of incarceration a person would leave with PTSD, rage, severe loss issues, and untreated and progressed addictions. It wouldn’t surprise me because inmates are forced to submit to humiliating commands – day in and day out. They’re stripped of all forms of independent thinking while the criminal justice system, systematically does nothing to rebuild them into citizens capable of functioning in today’s society.

Law enforcement is funded by tax dollars. A return on that investment is in need in the form of a rehabilitated somebody who could actually re-enter society as a changed person. I understand that incarceration is a war in which only the strong survive. But what about the prisoner who is genuinely striving to gain something positive from the prison experience – but instead of prison programs – is met with systemic obstacles and dead-ins at every turn.

Prison is hell-on-earth and is infested with negativity, pain and suffering. It’s a very aggressive environment that can break a man’s will to live. So why do the authorities practice devious tactics to make the prisoner’s stay worse than it already is? Yes, those same people who get paid to oversee the inmates. Yes, those same people who would rather confine the mentally ill to solitary confinement. Yes, those same administrators who would rather build more prisons versus offering prison art therapy programs for inmates.

It is hard to understand how anyone would argue that throwing thousands of criminally minded individuals into an unstable environment with virtually nothing constructive to do could actually improve crime rates in America. I can’t help but wonder how many of these people could have been saved if the jails tried to fix people versus making them worse-off? Could there be anything more confusing than a correctional system that doesn’t correct anything? Or anything more broken than a system that does the opposite of what it was designed to do?

The above facts lead me to the conclusion that our policies are partly responsible for high recidivism rates and ultimately, mass incarceration. In many ways, I believe they need it to function this way, and I believe that the authorities perpetuate harsh conditions for inmates. Why else would our loved ones come home with severe mental issues? Why else would they system continue to burden our communities with more broken people? America deserves better.