Matrix Logic & Real Logic

breakaway3
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
July 20, 2017

Logic, these days, has been replaced in schools with a mind-control apparatus that involves the following:

EVERY POINT OF VIEW IS EQUAL.

EVERYBODY HAS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE WHOLE.

CRITICAL THINKING LEAVES PEOPLE OUT OF THE GROUP AND IS THEREFORE PREJUDICIAL.

If you favor this new formulation and think it’s useful, I have condos on Jupiter for sale.

The point of modern education, more and more, is the GROUP.

“Good people belong to the group.”

“The Group is everything.”

“If you don’t belong to the Group, you have a mental disorder.”

Why is all this emphasis put on the Group?

The answer to that question also gives you the reason logic isn’t taught in schools anymore:

The independent self-sufficient individual is being phased out.

The independent individual who knows how to think and make lucid judgments on his own is a threat to the EMERGING RELIGION OF GLOBALISM.

The emerging religion of Globalism is a fuzzy image of THE GROUP.

The hive.

The colony.

The nest.

The planet.

Mother Earth.

Some people think education has been hijacked for the purpose of training children to become robotic workers for the State. That’s partly true, but I beg to differ. Actually, education is the proving ground for the religion of the Group. That is its real goal. And it’s been the goal for some time.

This religion doesn’t need or want logic. Logic would be disruptive. It would differentiate one student from another. It would reveal there are ways to analyze information that actually come to valid conclusions. Logic isn’t fuzzy. It doesn’t promote the all-inclusive hive.

A few years ago, I spoke to a teacher who was introducing his class to logic. He told me, “These are very bright kids. They’re all going to college. They said they couldn’t learn logic. They couldn’t do it. They had some kind of mental block.”

As we talked further, it became obvious that the mental block was an idea of THE GROUP. These kids had already been indoctrinated into “cooperative thought.” They instinctively realized that, if they studied logic, the Group would break apart. Each student would have to stand on his own, and that prospect was frightening.

In the religion of the Group, one of the key concepts is “the sustainability of the planet,” which is, after all, the largest group. This “sustainability” catchphrase is the leading edge of a vast movement to decide how you, as a UNIT, an energy-consuming UNIT, will be regulated in the overall scheme of things.

Your life will be ruled by decisions of the “wise ones,” who understand how to distribute all the available resources of the planet.

This is a perverse machine, but it needs to be presented as something soft and spiritual, in order to be sold: the “needs of the Group.”

I’ve actually had students tell me, in their fumbling way, that they have an obligation to think like everyone else. Or if they’re rebels, they have a duty to rebel like other rebels.

When I started writing this…

Continue Reading More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Advertisements

When The Most Basic Logic Fails To Penetrate The Mind

FakeNews

Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
June 27, 2017

As a freelance reporter, a main thrust of my research over the past 35 years has been medical fraud. Deep fraud. Fraud that takes place in research labs, where “new diseases” are discovered.

I wrote a number of articles about the so-called SARS outbreak of 2003. Health agencies and governments built up a ton of hysteria and sold it to the global public.

A few basic “facts”: Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) includes the following symptoms—cough, fever, fatigue, sore throat. It originated in South China. It is caused by the SARS coronavirus. SARS is unique. It is a newly discovered condition. The coronavirus is newly discovered.

I saw holes in this presentation. For example, the SARS symptoms are indistinguishable from ordinary traditional flu or other non-specific illness that has been known about for centuries.

I kept going.

The SARS coronavirus was purportedly discovered by World Health Organization researchers working in ten labs linked by a private closed-circuit communication system. No outside researchers were given access.

The WHO researchers very quickly found the unique and never-before-seen coronavirus.

No statistics were released that demonstrated how many diagnosed SARS patients had the coronavirus virus in their bodies and how many didn’t.

But months later, a WHO microbiologist in Canada, Frank Plummer, wandered off the reservation and spoke with reporters. What he said, in a series of statements, was shocking:

Plummer basically admitted that almost all of the newest blood samples from SARS patients coming into his lab showed no trace of the SARS coronavirus.

Here is where logic enters the scene. When I reported what Frank Plummer said, I concluded that something was very, very wrong, because…how could people be diagnosed with SARS when they didn’t have the SARS virus in their bodies?

However, even in certain independent media outlets, that conclusion didn’t catch on. People were unable to realize:

If a patient is diagnosed with a disease, and that disease is supposed to be caused by a particular virus, but that patient doesn’t have the virus in his body, he can’t have the disease.

It’s as if you read, “Linguistics researchers at MIT just finished studying the characteristics of 120,000 sentences that contain exactly five words. Their findings are based on sentences that contain four words.”

Red flags, alarm bells, stop signs.

Basic logic has been violated.

But it turns out that a certain percentage of the population doesn’t recognize contradictions. They just pass over them, as if they aren’t there.

“Let’s see. Almost all the newest SARS patients don’t have the SARS virus. Okay. I guess that’s unusual.”

Not unusual. Impossible, by definition.

This is how education works in these times. See a blatant contradiction? Move on. Doesn’t matter. Contradictions are…a matter of opinion. Some people see blue, other people see green.

If you were shepherding society into a new era where control from above would be much tighter, you’d want to decide how the population should think about information—and if you could disable their capacity to the point where blatant contradictions passed unnoticed, you would count that as a victory.

On the other hand, if you were a parent who was prepared to pay a stunning sum of money for your child to attend college, and you knew he would emerge, after four years, unable to tell the difference between “blue” and “not blue,” you might be disturbed.

Consider this: In the wake of microbiologist Frank Plummer’s astonishing remarks to the press in 2003, not one major media news outlet in the world followed up and launched a probing investigation of a SARS scandal. It didn’t happen. It hasn’t happened since.

“A newly discovered disease” with the same symptoms as ordinary seasonal flu is said to be unique, because every person who has it also has a never-before-seen virus EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT EVERY PERSON DOESN’T HAVE THE VIRUS.

Memo to college and medical school students: write a thousand words on the logical implications of the above paragraph.

If you can’t, turn around immediately and go back to high school. Stage protests until the school offers a mandatory course in logic taught by a competent instructor.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Zika, HIV: The Abstract Vs. The Concrete In The Pursuit Of Logic

TruthFact
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
June 26, 2017

Medical Warning: this article may require THINKING. Ask your doctor if thinking is right for you.

When a philosopher has no more room to move and finds his back up against a cold wall in the middle of the night, he usually throws up his hands and surrenders his abstract position to concrete interests (like money, position, and power). I watched this happen in the late 1980s, when I saw my first book, AIDS INC., come into print.

The book took on CAUSATION, one of the interests of both the medical and philosophical profession. My investigation centered on: how do you decide a particular germ causes a particular disease?

I won’t bother going into all the details here. Suffice it to say, when I contacted a few academic folks I knew from my days as a college student studying philosophy, they shut their eyes tight and pretended they were having a bad dream, nothing more. They built a wall of silence. You see, asking them for a comment about causation was now treading on medical territory—far more real than the realm of their usual philosophical fiddling. If it turned out the entire medical cartel was tap dancing and faking a concept of causation, in order to falsely blame certain viruses for causing certain (high-profit) diseases, THAT was a scandal of immense proportions. And these academic philosophers wanted no part of it. They didn’t want to see their cozy positions in ivory towers ripped asunder. They didn’t want the concrete to intrude on the abstract. It was all well and good to cite Hume and Ayer and various logicians on the issue of causation, when nothing was at stake, but to move forward into a world where, depending on your view of cause and effect, some people made billions of dollars while other people died unnecessarily…that was out of the question. Therefore, my book was “reckless.” Therefore: no comment. Therefore: “Leave us alone. We never meant for you to grab these ideas and actually use them, logically, to shake up the invisible power structure. You’re doing something unseemly. You’re reflecting badly on us. You’re endangering reputations.”

Aha.

Do not upset apple carts. Do not expose crimes.

In my book, AIDS INC., I performed an obscene act. I implied that, by any reasonable standard of cause and effect, HIV had never been proved to cause the condition called AIDS. I was suddenly a philosopher with a weapon. I was shining a light in a cave where researchers were plundering logic to fake a proof. And, to continue the exercise, I was therefore demonstrating that AIDS was not one condition at all. It was an array of circumstances that produced, in different ways, in different people, the destruction of the immune system—and if you wanted to heal THAT, you had to find, in each afflicted person, what had attacked his immune system (not HIV), and then you had to try to reverse that affliction. In doing so, you could save lives. If, on the other hand, you persisted with the HIV myth, and utilized highly toxic drugs like AZT, you would kill people. Many people.

But the “philosophers” I approached saw no benefit in examining that investigation. The benefit (to them) was in ignoring it.

I would have welcomed an honest debate. But no offer was forthcoming.

I already knew, from my college years, that the walled off Territory of the Abstract was its own province; but this experience with my book, in 1988, was the last straw.

I was trying to approach cowards.

Unfettered, reasoned free speech was not their aim.

Up to a point, advanced education exists. But when you go beyond that point, you’re in the Empty Quarter. You’re staring at a vast parched desert.

Turn around. Walk away. You’re on your own. Your education now takes on a completely different cast. You learn how to apply analysis and do investigation independently.

That process, speaking from experience, is exhilarating.

The mines, and the caves in them, contain gold.

Here’s a quick contemporary analysis of causation: the Zika virus. In a nutshell, Brazilian researchers, working at “ground zero of the purported microcephaly (birth defect) outbreak,” declared Zika to be the cause. However, they admitted—before they cut off all communication on the subject—that traces of Zika could only be found in roughly 15% of babies with microcephaly. This correlation was astonishingly weak.

No matter what version of cause and effect you might favor, there is no way under the sun you can conclude that Zika causes microcephaly, when it can’t be found in 85% of cases.

Any honest researcher will tell you this is a reason to reject Zika as the cause and go back to the drawing board.

But that hasn’t happened. In fact, several groups are conducting studies on a Zika vaccine. They’re plunging forward.

One of these candidate-vaccines delivers synthesized genes into the body…where the genes…permanently alter the recipient’s DNA.

In this case, lying about causation leads to unbridled tinkering with populations’ genetic structure.

But why should academic philosophers care about that? They’re in their safe world, apart from, what shall we call it, LIFE.

HIV faced a similar problem that Zika does. Researchers correlated a diagnosis of AIDS with a positive HIV antibody test: many people who tested positive were later diagnosed with AIDS. There was a problem, however. The HIV antibody test will register positive for at least 60 reasons that have nothing to do with the presence of HIV in the body.

Independent researcher Christine Johnson documented this fact. Her classic investigation has been reprinted at aliveandwell.org. Here is just a partial list of factors that will cause an HIV antibody test to read positive for reasons that have nothing to do with HIV:

1. Anti-carbohydrate antibodies (52,19,13)
2. Naturally-occurring antibodies (5,19)
3. Passive immunization: receipt of gamma globulin or immune globulin (as prophylaxis against infection which contains antibodies) (18, 26, 60, 4, 22, 42, 43, 13)
4. Leprosy (2, 25)
5. Tuberculosis (25)
6. Mycobacterium avium (25)
7. Systemic lupus erythematosus (15, 23)
8. Renal (kidney) failure (48, 23, 13)
9. Hemodialysis/renal failure (56, 16, 41, 10, 49)
10. Alpha interferon therapy in hemodialysis patients (54)
11. Flu (36)
12. Flu vaccination (30, 11, 3, 20, 13, 43)
13. Herpes simplex I (27)
14. Herpes simplex II (11)
15. Upper respiratory tract infection (cold or flu) (11)
16. Recent viral infection or exposure to viral vaccines (11)
17. Prior pregnancy (58, 53, 13, 43, 36, 65)

Fake causation. It’s a big one.

There is much, much more to the HIV story (including serious doubts about whether HIV actually exists). But you get the general idea. The correlation between HIV and AIDS is irreparably weak…

I had a brief conversation about this with an academic philosophy professor. It went this way:

—So, Professor, you see that this is an issue of causation. If the correlation is very weak, the whole assumption of causation fails.

—Well, I don’t know about that. Other factors could be involved.

—Such as?

—That’s the whole point. We don’t know what the other factors are.

—We know enough. If researchers are going to say a particular virus causes a particular disease, they have to establish, at minimum, strong correlation. They have to prove, for starters, that the virus is present in the overwhelming percentage of cases of the disease.

—So this is the kind of thing you’ve been doing since you graduated from school?

—Yes.

—I think you need to reassess your approach.

—Why?

—Disease causation is an issue best left to medical experts.

—Why?

—It’s their field.

That’s where the conversation ended.

Beautiful, just beautiful.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Logic and Non-logic In Education

breakaway3
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
March 28, 2017

In two of my collections, The Matrix Revealed and Power Outside The Matrix, I include basic training in the art of logic and more advanced critical analysis.

The basic fact is: students in schools are rarely taught how to follow a line of reasoning from beginning to end. Nor do they practice analyzing half-formed, faulty arguments.

Who teaches young students, these days, how to distinguish between a polemic and a formal argument?

Teachers spend little or no time discussing hidden premises or assumptions, which color a subsequent argument.

Increasingly, people are “learning” from watching videos. Some videos are well done; many others intentionally omit vital data and make inferences based on “shocking images.”

A focused study of logic can illuminate a range of subjects and disciplines. It can suddenly bring perspective to fields of inquiry that were formerly mysterious and impenetrable.

Logic is the parent of knowledge. It contains the principles and methods common to all investigation.

Being able to spot and understand logical flaws and fallacies embedded in an article, essay, book immediately lifts the intelligence level.

Logic isn’t a prison; one isn’t forced to obey its rules. But the ability to deploy it, versus not understanding what it is, is like the difference between randomly hammering at a keyboard and typing coherent paragraphs. It’s the difference between, “I guess I agree with what he’s writing,” and “I know exactly how he’s making his argument.”

In the West, the tradition of logic was codified by Aristotle. Before him, Plato, in the Socratic Dialogues, employed it to confound Socrates’ opponents.

Reading the Dialogues today, one can see, transparently, where Plato’s Socrates made questionable assumptions, which he then successfully foisted on those opponents. It’s quite instructive to go back and chart Socrates’ clever steps. You see logic and illogic at work.

High schools today don’t teach logic for two reasons. The teachers don’t understand the subject, and logic as a separate discipline has been deleted because students, armed with it, would become authentically independent. The goal of education rejects independent minds, despite assurances to the contrary.

Logic and critical analysis should be taught in phases, with each phase encompassing more complex passages of text offered for scrutiny.

Eventually, students would delve into thorny circumstantial arguments, which make up a great deal of modern investigation and research, and which need to be assessed on the basis of degrees of probable validity and truth.

It’s like a climbing a mountain. The lower paths are relatively easy, if the map is clear. At higher elevation, more elements come into play, and a greater degree of skill and experience is required.

My college logic teacher introduced his subject to the class this way: Once you’ve finished this semester, you’ll know what you know, and you’ll know what you don’t know.

The second part of his statement has great value. It enables real research beyond egotistical concerns, beyond self-serving presumptions, beyond secretly assuming what you’re pretending to prove.

We certainly don’t live in an age of reason; far from it. Therefore—the greater need to learn logic. Among other benefits, it centers the thinking process.

In a landscape of controversy, babble, bluster, public relations, covert propaganda, and outright lying, one has a dependable compass.

For instance, understanding the scientific method (hypothesis-prediction-verification) would go a long way toward untangling some of the outrageous claims of science, and separating them from the political agendas they serve.

Beginning in ancient Greece, coming up through the Middle Ages, and into the 19th century, logic was one aspect of education called the Trivium (“the three”): in sequence, a student learned grammar, then logic, then rhetoric.

Except in scattered places, where people have consciously instituted a revival of the Trivium, that integrated method of teaching is gone now.

Instead, in primary and middle schools, we have superficial coasting through many academic subjects, minus the necessary exercises and drills to ensure that students grasp material. In other words, we have imposed ADHD.

Logic isn’t the end-all and be-all of life. It doesn’t define what life is. It’s a tool. You either have it or you don’t. You can use it or you can’t. When you can, you have more power, and whole new vistas, previously unseen, open up to you.

Logic is a tool in your box. When you need to go in and remove it and use it, is it dull or is it sharp?

Finally, studying logic gives a student an appreciation of consequences. For example, a politician announces a high-flying generalization, as a plank of his platform. Two things ought to follow. The student does his best to translate that generality into specific terms which actually mean something. Then he traces what would happen if the plank were, in fact, put into effect; what would the consequences specifically entail? There are always consequences—it’s just that most people never see them or think about them, because they haven’t the foggiest idea about how to flesh them out and map their implications.

Logic: one of the great contributions to civilization, left to die on the vine.

It needs to be resurrected, in full flower.

Read More At: NoMoreFakeNews.com

Book Review: Sherlock Holmes – The Complete Novels & Stories by Arthur Conan Doyle

A Veritable Critical Thinking Continuum Wrapped Up In Fiction

SherlockHolmes
TheBreakaway | BreakawayConciousness
Zy Marquiez
March 20, 2017

Ironically, it was through the most serendipitous of circumstances that this novel was suggested to me.  Following a lengthy discourse with my economics professor a long time ago in which I asked what he thought was the best way to learn logic, he, in his classic fashion, suggests not a textbook, but Sherlock Holmes!  At the time, thought it was a joke myself.  Interestingly enough, he wasn’t joking.

Here, now, many years later, the adventures of Sherlock Holmes were the way that yours truly was introduced to logic, and great fiction to boot, too.

Arthur Conan Doyle’s magnum opus, Sherlock Holmes, features characters that are rather unique but very believable; the setting is always top-tier and authentic, the mysteries abound, and there’s puzzles wrapped in enigmas all woven into phenomenal fiction as well.  This is one of the great reasons rereading this series is so easy and serves as a fictional fall back for reading, especially when a lot of modern fiction is quite lacking.

In more modern times, there have been great mystery writers, and many imitators in countless ways, but none has truly come close to creating a fun, readable, witty, critical thinking, logical, and intriguing series in the way that Arthur Conan Doyle did when the Sherlock Holmes series.  Those who attempt to follow in the author’s footsteps fall quite short, even when the authors have a template of what worked in the past.  This is why, after my third reading of this series, it’s still a great as ever, and nothing really compares.  And what’s more, there’s always something to learn from it, too.

Let’s boil it down.  Great fiction is great, because it allows wonder, and sparks the imagination like nothing else.  Sherlock Holmes definitely creates an auspicious and believable adventure upon which any curious mind would love to venture.

This fictional series does way more than that though.  If it had only sparked imagination, it would have been a really good, or even great series.  But even so, it offers so much more.  Sherlock Holmes is a veritable crashcourse into how to critically think and employ logic, wrapped up in a fantastic fictional package that is as timeless as it is robust.

For me, this book falls within what Mortimer J. Adler & Charles Van Doren referred to as the top tier of books.  As the authors note in their landmark How To Read A Book – The Classic Guide To Intelligent Reading:

“Of the few thousand such books there is a much smaller number – here the number is probably less than a hundred – that cannot be exhausted by even the very best reading you can manage.  How do you recognize this?  Again it is rather mysterious, but when you have closed the book after reading analytically to the best of your ability, and place it back on the shelf, you have a sneaking suspicion that there is more there than you got….In fact, you cannot put your finger on it, but you know it is there.  You find that you cannot forget the book, that you keep thinking about it and your reaction to it.  Finally, you return to it.  And remarkable things happen.”[1][Bold Emphasis Added]

Furthermore, the authors elucidate:

“…if the book belongs to the highest class – the very small number of inexhaustible books – you discover on returning that the book seems to have grown with you.  You see new things in it – whole new sets of new things – that you did not see before.  Your previous understanding of the book is not invalidated; it is just as true as it ever was, and in the same ways that it was true before.  But now it is true in still other ways, too.”[2] [Bold Emphasis Added]

For me, this book – all of its fictional stories – accomplishes all of the above and more.

Sure, there are many other books that offer many life lessons, and the classics are riddled with them. However, none teach the individual the foundation for critical thinking and logic like Sherlock Holmes does.  This is why this stands above and beyond countless other books when it comes to those two crucial points for me personally.

If you homeschool, if you’re an autodidact, a self-directed learner, or simply someone that wants to read a great book, then read this.  You will not regret it.

__________________________________________________
Footnotes:

[1] Mortimer J. Adler & Charles Van Doren, How To Read A Book – The Classic Guide To Intelligent Reading, p. 333.
[2] Ibid., p. 333.
__________________________________________________

This article is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Zy Marquiez and TheBreakaway.wordpress.com.
__________________________________________________
About The Author:

Zy Marquiez is an avid book reviewer, researcher, an open-minded skeptic, yogi, humanitarian, and freelance writer who studies regularly subjects like Consciousness, Education, Creativity, The Individual, Ancient History & Ancient Civilizations, Forbidden Archaeology, Big Pharma, Alternative Health, Space, Geoengineering, Social Engineering, Propaganda, and much more.

His own personal blog is BreakawayConsciousnessBlog.wordpress.com where his personal work is shared, while TheBreakaway.wordpress.com serves as a media portal which mirrors vital information usually ignored by mainstream press, but still highly crucial to our individual understanding of various facets of the world.

 

Logic In The Matrix: The Declaration Of Independence

logic3
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
Jon Rappoport
February 26, 2017

Logic, these days, has been replaced in schools with a mind-control apparatus that involves the following:

EVERY POINT OF VIEW IS EQUAL.

EVERYBODY HAS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE WHOLE.

TRUE CRITICAL THINKING, WHICH IS THE EXCLUSIVE TERRITORY OF THE INDIVIDUAL, LEAVES PEOPLE OUT OF THE GROUP AND IS THEREFORE PREJUDICIAL.

If you favor this new formulation and think it’s useful, I have condos on Jupiter for sale.

The point of modern education, more and more, is the GROUP.

“Good people belong to the group.”

“The Group is everything.”

“If you don’t belong to the Group, you have a mental disorder.”

Why is all this emphasis put on the Group?

The answer to that question also gives you the reason logic isn’t taught in schools anymore:

The independent self-sufficient individual is being phased out.

The independent individual who knows how to think and make lucid judgments on his own is a threat to the EMERGING RELIGION OF GLOBALISM.

The emerging religion of Globalism is a fuzzy image of THE GROUP.

The hive.

The colony.

The nest.

The planet.

Some people think education has been hijacked for the purpose of training children to become robotic workers for the State. That’s partly true, but education is also the proving ground for the religion of the Group.

This religion doesn’t need or want logic. Logic would be disruptive. It would differentiate one student from another. It would reveal there are ways to analyze information that actually come to valid conclusions. Logic isn’t fuzzy. It doesn’t promote the all-inclusive hive.

A year ago, I spoke to a teacher who was introducing his class to logic. He told me, “These are very bright kids. They’re all going to college. They said they couldn’t learn logic. They couldn’t do it. They had some kind of mental block.”

As we talked further, it became obvious that the mental block was an idea of THE GROUP. These kids had already been indoctrinated into “cooperative thought.” They instinctively realized that, if they studied logic, the Group would break apart. Each student would have to stand on his own, and that prospect was frightening.

In the religion of the Group, one of the key concepts is “the sustainability of the planet,” a catchphrase which is the leading edge of a vast movement to decide how the individual, as a UNIT, an energy-consuming UNIT, will be regulated in the overall scheme of things.

The individual’s life will be ruled by decisions of the “wise ones,” who understand how to distribute all the available resources of the planet.

I’ve actually had students tell me, in their fumbling way, that they have an obligation to think like everyone else. Or if they’re rebels, they have a duty to rebel like other rebels.

Logic is a sword that cuts through all that. It wakes up the sleeping mind. It doesn’t paint vague pictures. It has nothing to do with what the Group thinks or has been taught to think.

Logic isn’t a cooperative enterprise. That’s why it was exiled from school systems a long time ago.

I’ve talked to many teachers (I used to teach school) who tell me they lead their students on this basis: “we’re all in this together.”

It sounds nice, but it has nothing to do with education. It’s a con. It’s a way of avoiding teaching. Once a teacher walks down that road, he’s finished. He’s regressing back to being a child. He’s forfeiting his position. He’s involved in socializing. It can work for a picnic but not for school.

The cooperative spirit in the classroom is the prelude to the religion of the Group. “We’re all in this together” is the initial sales pitch.

I remember, 40 years ago, I had an argument with a teacher who was very annoyed that I was attacking the “spirit of the group” concept. He was absolutely convinced that the atmosphere he promoted in his classroom…

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Book Review: The Trivium – The Liberal Arts Of Logic, Grammar & Rhetoric by Sister Miriam Joseph Ph.D.

thetrivium
TheBreakaway
Zy Marquiez
February 24, 2017

In their How To Read A Book – The Classical Guide To Intelligent Reading [review here], Mortimer J. Adler & Charles Van Doren postulated that most published books out there will not be complex enough to teach the reader anything of true substance.

However, the authors also argued that there is a second tier of books “from which you can learn – both how to read and how to live.”[1] Am venturing to say that The Trivium is one of those books, from which an immense amount can be learned because of its inherent nature of all it teaches.

The Trivium – The Liberal Arts Of Logic, Grammar & Rhetoric by Sister Miriam Joseph Ph.D., is an exemplary book that touches topics which do not get the light of day in modern times, although surely did centuries ago.

As this passage by Marguerite McGlinn relates, which speaks incisively:

“Ultimately, Sister Miriam Joseph speaks most eloquently about the value of this book.  She explains that studying the liberal arts [The Trivium] is an intransitive activity; the effect of studying these arts stays within the individual and perfects the faculties of the mind and spirit.  She compares the studying of the liberal arts with the blooming of the rose; it brings to fruition the possibilities of human nature.  She writes, “The utilitarian or servile arts enable one to be a servant – of another person, of the state, of a corporation, or a business – and to earn a living.  The liberal arts, in contrast, teach one how to live; they train the faculties and bring them to perfection; they enable a person to rise above his material environment to live an intellectual, a rational, and therefore a free life in gaining truth.”[2][Bold Emphasis Added]

The book doesn’t just speak of The Trivium, but shows all of its main components to boot, and furthermore how to employ them.

By covering the vital topics of Logic, Grammar & Rhetoric, The Trivium goes above and beyond most books that are ‘mandatory’ in the public school system.

Given that the once mandatory subjects of rhetoric and logic are all but gone from mainstream education and only shadows of those remains while what is taught of grammar is very superficial, a book like this blows away anything that regular schooling could offer.

Why such a bold statement?  Because the Trivium is the foundation upon which classical education was built.  However, after a shift away from these tenets, the Trivium has been removed from the system of public schooling to the detriment of the students.

In any case, The Trivium features not only a very methodical approach into the learning/teaching of Grammar, Logic and Rhetoric, but the book is also chock-full of myriad examples coming straight from the upper tiers of literary history which are used to cement each component of the Trivium.

Further, not only does this book explain in detail the core concepts of the Trivium, but at certain junctures it even offers some exercises in order to apply what one has learned and gauge an individual’s progress.

The Trivium is really a thorough presentation that encompasses everything from poetics, fallacies, syllogisms, propositions, grammar, composition, enthymemes and much much more.

If you’re a homeschooler, an unschooler, an autodidact, a self-teacher, or simply someone that is seeking to teach someone, or simply wish to learn about these integral components of education, then ruminate deeply about getting this book.  Its lessons would benefit every individual come to terms with the greater capability that they always could have, but never found a way to achieve through the terribly lacking public schooling system.

Those seeking additional educational tools may appreciate:

Socratic Logic [V3.1] by Peter Kreeft Ph.D.
A Workbook For Arguments [2nd Edition] – A Complete Course In Critical Thinking by David R. Morrow & Anthony Wesson
How To Read A Book – The Classic Guide To Intelligent Reading by Mortimer J. Adler & Charles Van Doren

Each of these books will build a more robust mental repertoire, and are highly recommended for everyone.

_______________________________________________________________
Sources & References:
[1] Mortimer J. Adler & Charles Van Doren, How To Read A Book, Mortimer J. Adler & Charles Van Doren. p. 332.
[2] Sister Miriam Joseph Ph.D.,The Trivium – The Liberal Arts Of Logic, Grammar & Rhetoric, pp. x-xi.
_______________________________________________________________
This article is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Zy Marquiez and TheBreakaway.wordpress.com.