Daybrown: IQ tests were designed to identify the likelihood of success in academic and corporate cultures. Speed of processing is very important. Those whose minds work more slowly, can also work more deeply
The way i see it, the speed of a mind is independent of it's depth. The worst mind is slow and shallow, a better mind is fast and shallow, much better is slow and deep, the best mind can choose it's speed and is deep. Enlightenment needs depth, and speed means there can be more of it.
Daybrown: Those who can work alone are not limited by group think.
I like that.
Daybrown: Much of what passes for intelligence is the facility of quickly coming up with reasons to justify unsupported premises that the group already has. Being informed, only in that which supports the group think, is rewarded. Being aware of downsides or unintended consequences, which commonly come from thinking more deeply on a matter, are suppressed. Ambivalence and doubt are regarded as heresy.
I like that too.
Daybrown: Dr. Freud noted that neurotics cant tolerate ambiguity, and therefore tend to jump to conclusions based on inadequate data. He also comments on the ingenuity applied to explain why one thinks as one does despite the presentation of contrary facts revealed later. Finally, if you do manage to dispel an illusion, the reaction is anger.
Epictetus commented on this, noting that when a man proved he was wrong, he was grateful to no longer be thinking wrongly. However, he added, that when he performs the same service for another, the man always goes away angry.
Interesting isn't it. Insecurity really gets in the way, doesn't it. Desperately trying to uphold the lie of an ego that is powerful and right is more important to most than truth and development. They've long ago given up truth for lies that cripple the mind.
Daybrown: Nowhere is this combination of group think and neurosis so obvious as with 911. The media, aware of the distress of the public, and for the sake of ratings, wanted to come out with explanations first, which they knew would settle the fear of the public. The government provided those explanations which fit within its own group think, which the media accepted without much intelligent, logical, examination.
Then, when other questions which were not at first considered were presented, or others arose as other bits of data came in, as these were posted the immediate and most common response was anger, typified by sarcasm and ad hominum to anyone daring to challenge the group think. Becoming 'informed' meant dealing with a much wider set of data than was presented in the aftermath, or even to the 911 commission.
A lot of people simply did not want to think about all that. It was too much, and exceeded their attention spans. That mass represented a powerful political force which some saw as useful in the pursuance of their own agendas, so they pandered to it, in part by being dismissive of any data that contradicted the original group think. A lot of intelligent people are already too busy with their lives and careers to have the time to be that well informed about an event with so many different theories and partisans promoting them.
For them, the way to "move on" was to park 911 in the past and let it go. There's been a good case that congress already had too much to deal with besides a more thorough investigation of what 911 was all about. For if 911 was not just Islamic terrorists, then it opened up to much ambiguity for the neurotic mass mind to deal with as to who all was involved.
But whatever, if we are now to be intelligent and informed, then its worth considering on where things will go from here. Knowing what we do about group think, all these questions about 911 will continue to simmer on the back burner as long as the global economy keeps on. That issue depends in large part on what the foreign holders of dollar denominated investments will make of further, and somewhat obscure, reports now being posted as those who were in a position in the US government and military retire, and thereby free themselves from the group think imposed by their career ambitions.
How about another example. How about the way group think relates to ignorance of the nature of reality. To this end i reproduce a section of "Wisdom of the Infinite" by David Quinn.
The Will to Unconsciousness
It is sometimes said to me, "It all sounds too simple and convenient for my liking. If cause and effect is the ultimate answer to everything, then why doesn't everybody subscribe to it? Why isn't it taught in schools? Why aren't the great thinkers preaching it? Why have I never heard about it before?"
These are good questions. I think it is mainly because people are afraid of it. Deep down, most people do have an inkling of the significance of cause and effect - it is hard not to since it pervades everything they do - but they are loathe to bring it more fully into their consciousness and investigate it seriously. They realise intuitively that a serious interest in cause and effect would almost invariably destroy life as they know it. It would undermine everything they enjoy and believe in. And so, on a subconscious level, they have set up large mental blocks to fortify their minds against it.
It is quite a fascinating phenomenon when you reflect upon it. After all, it must be obvious to anyone with an ounce of intelligence that cause and effect is fundamentally important to our understanding of the world. Not only must it necessarily form the kernel of any theory we care to create about the world, but it is visible in every aspect of our daily lives. It is the ultimate explanation of all things; it is the final fruition of wielding Ockham's razor to the fullest extent; it is the Theory of Everything boiled down to its purest essence. I mean, what a prize! Surely, you would think, such an obvious all-pervasive principle would present an exciting avenue of investigation for anyone even remotely interested in philosophy and spirituality. And yet it is universally ignored the world over. No one ever talks about it or thinks about it. This alone should set the alarm bells ringing. Something is seriously amiss here.
But then again, as I say, it is entirely understandable that people want to avoid all consciousness of cause and effect. Becoming conscious of cause and effect is dangerous. The more you absorb it into your being, the more it will dissolve the basis of your egotistical existence and undermine the egotistical values of love, family, happiness, community, religion, suffering and hate. It will fling you into the austere, starry realm of the Infinite - a realm from which most of humanity shrinks.
If a person recognized and accepted that everything which happens in the world is caused to happen, including his own thoughts and actions, then how could he continue to believe in his own free-will? How could he take pride in his achievements when he succeeds, or indulge in the pleasures of self-pity when he fails? How could he believe in the idea of gain and loss, and experience the ups and downs of normal emotional life which most people find so appealing? How could he take pleasure in what other people achieve, or experience the joys of anger and violence against those who seem to mistreat him? How could he indulge in any kind of life at all?
Thus, it should come as no surprise that most people intuitively regard the philosophic life as a kind of living death. Involving oneself with cause and effect literally pulls the rug from under everything that the human race finds meaningful. There is no longer any basis for getting involved in a relationship, or experiencing satisfaction from a successful career, or finding pleasure in the triumphs of sport and hobbies. Even to become involved in these things in the first place is to fall into the delusion that things really exist. The concept of cause and effect is like a virus that takes over the philosopher's mind, destroying all of his human values and rendering him unfeeling, sterile and inhuman.
So, in the end, this is the core reason why cause and effect is never discussed or thought about in the world today. Everyone wants to keep it hidden, out of mind and out of sight, so that nobody has to deal with it. Everyone adheres to the unspoken principle that the very basis for enjoying life needs to be preserved at all costs and the conventional mental shutters need to be vigilantly maintained. Even scientific and academic pursuit can be seen as a process of intelligent people doing everything they can to avoid exploring the obvious truth of causality. They are intelligent enough to understand the concept and discern its significance, but far too timid to deal with it directly. Like little children, they need to be constantly distracted, otherwise they might start to get upset.
It is at this point that we can finally begin to understand the spiritual concept of faith. The genuine faith of a spiritual man has nothing to do with blindly clinging to an unprovable belief, as the Christians would have it. On the contrary, it involves submitting to what you know to be ultimately true in life, even though such a submission effectively means the forfeiting of your life. As Soren Kierkegaard so eloquently expressed it, "To have faith is really to advance along the way where all the human road signs point: back, back, back."
Or as Jesus once put it: "Blessed is he who is not offended!"
