GENIUS FORUMS

What Logic Is!

Logic is not an educated truth, it is a truth which makes sense, one which is indisputable just by the very fact it makes sense and is undeniable. Education is not a factor, however, it was through the 'educated' I learned of my truth and ability.

I use my logic to help people, because I have natural insight, a gift given to me by my Lord and Heavenly Father. My intention is never to brag, but to inform, educate, guide, entertain, or amuse you in some way.

My natural insight into people is because everyone is connected to me, so I understand everyone because I understand myself first which enables me to understand others. What I really understand about people is their thoughts. I read the words they use which paints a picture of them.

I hope my words paint the picture I want painted of myself. I want to control the way people perceive me, I want them to see me as the good I depict of myself to be, but I realize I cannot control people to think my way. All I can do is influence them with the usage of my words, persuade or encourage them. All I can do is be myself, if I am depicted as bad in some way, all I can say to that is my words would have to change.

What Logic Is!

Not every thought is logical, some are ridiculous. When I write from now on, I shall point out a logical truth.

I always knew something about me was truth, but I didn't know what, I knew I was intelligent, but I knew it was something more than that. I knew I was highly aware, but it was something more than that too. It was my logic ability that I didn't know I had, until truth was told to me.

My most education came from theabsolute.net this very genius forum where I became a member in 2003, was booted out, grew up learned my lesson and was accepted back in.

What logic is, is the reasonable answer!

mensa-maniac wrote:I hope my words paint the picture I want painted of myself. I want to control the way people perceive me, I want them to see me as the good I depict of myself to be, but I realize I cannot control people to think my way. All I can do is influence them with the usage of my words, persuade or encourage them. All I can do is be myself, if I am depicted as bad in some way, all I can say to that is my words would have to change.

This is what I believe is called egoism. Wanting to be in the light, painted white, seen as a good person, and not in the dark, painted black, and seen as a bad person. As I understand it, that's the nuts and bolts of the world's greatest illness, and likely the psychological aperture of all mental illness.

I know that there is a correlation between Narcissistic Personality Disorder and using the words I, Me, and Mine a lot. I think in general the more value placed on one's self-image, the more one worries oneself sick over it. As an exercise, try not thinking about yourself for extended periods of time. And I don't mean, talking, acting or what-not, but actually thinking about yourself. I think you'll find that it is quite habitual for most human beings, and you'll observe a direction correlation between how much one thinks about their self and how much they suffer delusion.

To me, logic gets distorted by thinking about oneself. A person can very well know what is logical but outright ignore it for sake of their own self-image. That's basically the basis of all conflict. When people are worried about how they are seen, or how they benefit, they ignore the truth that they know to be true. There is a quiet voice of reason amidst a blaring ego.

Animus wrote:

mensa-maniac wrote:I hope my words paint the picture I want painted of myself. I want to control the way people perceive me, I want them to see me as the good I depict of myself to be, but I realize I cannot control people to think my way. All I can do is influence them with the usage of my words, persuade or encourage them. All I can do is be myself, if I am depicted as bad in some way, all I can say to that is my words would have to change.

This is what I believe is called egoism. Wanting to be in the light, painted white, seen as a good person, and not in the dark, painted black, and seen as a bad person. As I understand it, that's the nuts and bolts of the world's greatest illness, and likely the psychological aperture of all mental illness.

Mensa maniac says: How the heck do you derive mental illness from that paragraph, you're full toilet sewage. However, I did smoke a joint last night when I wrote it, so I was under the influence, you can see the difference in tones of voice from that piece of writing to this piece of writing.

Mensa says: I'm not mentally ill moron and never was! I'm mentally skilled not mentally illed. I take a monthly injection to block the neurotransmitter dopamine from producing to much, that is all. Before ever taking this drug the only problem I had was that I couldn't focus my attention because I was overly rapid. In other words I was extremely hyper-active, I was never mentally ill, and now I take a drug to control this, which has been 13 years now, so the drugs are controlling the problem, that means there is no mental illness--get it, so please refrain from using the words mental illness in association to me.

I know that there is a correlation between Narcissistic Personality Disorder and using the words I, Me, and Mine a lot. I think in general the more value placed on one's self-image, the more one worries oneself sick over it. As an exercise, try not thinking about yourself for extended periods of time. And I don't mean, talking, acting or what-not, but actually thinking about yourself. I think you'll find that it is quite habitual for most human beings, and you'll observe a direction correlation between how much one thinks about their self and how much they suffer delusion.

Mensa says: You derived all this from that one small paragraph I wrote.

Mensa says: I don't believe for one minute I'm narcissistic just because I use myself as a premium example of topic. I speak of myself because I am of truth and value. Truth is valuable when shared with others.

To me, logic gets distorted by thinking about oneself. A person can very well know what is logical but outright ignore it for sake of their own self-image. That's basically the basis of all conflict. When people are worried about how they are seen, or how they benefit, they ignore the truth that they know to be true. There is a quiet voice of reason amidst a blaring ego.

Mensa says: Believe me Animus I could logically argue what you say, and I started to but declined because I'd make your statement look silly.

Animus wrote:

mensa-maniac wrote:I hope my words paint the picture I want painted of myself. I want to control the way people perceive me, I want them to see me as the good I depict of myself to be, but I realize I cannot control people to think my way. All I can do is influence them with the usage of my words, persuade or encourage them. All I can do is be myself, if I am depicted as bad in some way, then my words must change or the depictor is mistaken.

This is what I believe is called egoism. Wanting to be in the light, painted white, seen as a good person, and not in the dark, painted black, and seen as a bad person. As I understand it, that's the nuts and bolts of the world's greatest illness, and likely the psychological aperture of all mental illness.

Mensa says: It's not that I want to be in the light, it's that I am light, and am acknowledged for it. My darkness is the same darkness as everyone else, and that is the vile which speweth from our mouths which defile our spirits. The poison is like death upon our souls, for words can kill or bring life. It's Bible stuff said philosophically, not mental illness Bozo.

Mensa says: You need to understand what logic is and I'm going to teach you what logic is by pointing out every logical statement I make.

Mensa says: Kevin Solways words says it best, "Jealousies of the Intellect" People are so jealous because I was given the truth of my being logical. It's like I must defend myself against stupidity.

I know that there is a correlation between Narcissistic Personality Disorder and using the words I, Me, and Mine a lot. I think in general the more value placed on one's self-image, the more one worries oneself sick over it. As an exercise, try not thinking about yourself for extended periods of time. And I don't mean, talking, acting or what-not, but actually thinking about yourself. I think you'll find that it is quite habitual for most human beings, and you'll observe a direction correlation between how much one thinks about their self and how much they suffer delusion.

Mensa says: I use I, Me, and Mine, to let the reader know I'm referring to myself! That statement is a logical truth.

Mensa says: There is no delusion in logic.

To me, logic gets distorted by thinking about oneself. A person can very well know what is logical but outright ignore it for sake of their own self-image. That's basically the basis of all conflict. When people are worried about how they are seen, or how they benefit, they ignore the truth that they know to be true. There is a quiet voice of reason amidst a blaring ego.

Mensa says: Logic cannot get distorted unless brain damage occurs.

Yes it does. It happens every time someone says "Ours is the best" as in "America is the best", or "Christianity has the one and only truth". You see it every day... or you don't see it... depending on your ability to see it.

Psychologists presented a statement to American subjects asking their opinion, the statement goes somewhat like follows:

A German automobile manufacturer (VW/Audi/BMW/etc) has developed a new line of vehicle that has proven to be more harmful environmentally than most vehicles on the road, however the cost to produce this vehicle was very high. Should the vehicle be banned from American roads?

To this, most AMERICANs say "Yes it should be banned". But if the scenario is reversed:

An AMERICAN automobile manufacturer has developed a new line of vehicle that has proven to be more harmful environmentally than most vehicles on the road, however the cost to produce was very high. Should the vehicle be banned from GERMAN roads?

In this case, most AMERICANs say "No, it shouldn't be."

Although the environmental impact is identical, the economic impact is not, and participants identify with their own country!!! thus altering their judgement on an otherwise identical statement.

This sort of ego-bound bias of reasoning has been proven time and time again, as if it needed to be anyway, everyone knows its true.

Animus wrote:Yes it does. It happens every time someone says "Ours is the best" as in "America is the best", or "Christianity has the one and only truth". You see it every day... or you don't see it... depending on your ability to see it.

Psychologists presented a statement to American subjects asking their opinion, the statement goes somewhat like follows:

A German automobile manufacturer (VW/Audi/BMW/etc) has developed a new line of vehicle that has proven to be more harmful environmentally than most vehicles on the road, however the cost to produce this vehicle was very high. Should the vehicle be banned from American roads?

To this, most AMERICANs say "Yes it should be banned". But if the scenario is reversed:

An AMERICAN automobile manufacturer has developed a new line of vehicle that has proven to be more harmful environmentally than most vehicles on the road, however the cost to produce was very high. Should the vehicle be banned from GERMAN roads?

In this case, most AMERICANs say "No, it shouldn't be."

Although the environmental impact is identical, the economic impact is not, and participants identify with their own country!!! thus altering their judgement on an otherwise identical statement.

This sort of ego-bound bias of reasoning has been proven time and time again, as if it needed to be anyway, everyone knows its true.

Mensa says: The main idea is that it's been proven more harmful to the environment than any other vehicle, so it wouldn't be logical to produce the vehicle on German roads or any roads regardless of the cost.

Animus wrote:Although the environmental impact is identical, the economic impact is not, and participants identify with their own country!!! thus altering their judgement on an otherwise identical statement. This sort of ego-bound bias of reasoning has been proven time and time again, as if it needed to be anyway, everyone knows its true.

They identify with their own country. Could lead to globalization if it is in America.
Some people could be chauvinists, other nationalists and others could present their flag through economic currents. And then there are others who want to keep things separate but unitary at the same time...looking for the forms of the environmental impact of some analog and alternating current.

What Logic Is!

The bottom line is as I mentioned is the very fact that the car was proven to be harmful to the environment, so logically speaking it would be downright wrong to produce the vehicle in any environment. So the vehicle should be banned.

Yes it should be banned with some other logic. But isn't logic destructive and piercing ? If it would clear the way for some thing, then something else has to make place. Some logic destroys some universe on the far end where it is visible, and other systems of logic try to counter this. But today it seems that it is too late for most of the world. Certain systems are prevailing while others are in a minority. It looks like everything is going down. The wielding of such systems is done by other systems. Transcending things will get one nowhere.

I think its a duel processor

Manatron wrote:Yes it should be banned with some other logic. But isn't logic destructive and piercing ? If it would clear the way for some thing, then something else has to make place. Some logic destroys some universe on the far end where it is visible, and other systems of logic try to counter this. But today it seems that it is too late for most of the world. Certain systems are prevailing while others are in a minority. It looks like everything is going down. The wielding of such systems is done by other systems. Transcending things will get one nowhere.

Mensa says: "Yes it should be banned with some other logic."
There is no other logic, the logic is not to produce a vehicle that is harmful to the environment, it makes no difference at all what location the vehicle is in. Why is it so difficult for you to see logic?

Mensa says: "Yes it should be banned with some other logic."
There is no other logic, the logic is not to produce a vehicle that is harmful to the environment, it makes no difference at all what location the vehicle is in. Why is it so difficult for you to see logic?

It is not that difficult. You are saying that you are drawing the line.

What Logic Is

Yes, I apologize for that. But, if there is any other logic to this story please enlighten me.

Doesn't it seem like the only answer? That the vehicle should never be produced anywhere in the whole world just for the fact that it is harmful to the environment?

mensa-maniac wrote:What Logic Is

Yes, I apologize for that. But, if there is any other logic to this story please enlighten me.

Doesn't it seem like the only answer? That the vehicle should never be produced anywhere in the whole world just for the fact that it is harmful to the environment?

It matters economically to Americans because they have historically sustained a good chunk of the automotive industry. However, over the last few decades they've lost considerable market share to Japanese manufacturers. Germany also produces at least three major brands; Volkswagon, Bavarian Motor Works and Audi. Korea is the homefront of the Automotive company Kia. Not to mention Italian imports. The American automotive industry tries very hard to maintain its share of the market, and makes foreign acquisitions wherever possible. In 1985 General Motors launched Saturn to combat the growing Japanese market. The United States has gone through a series of bailouts to their automotive giants GM, Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep. Much of the American economy rests on their Automotive industry.


So, you can see how economic forces may contribute to the choice by Americans to favour the American vehicles. Though, this is the same self-preservatory mechanism that would otherwise cause them to do the same.

By the way; its not just Americans that are worried about a collapse of the American automotive industry. Many people in Canada are equally concerned, in particular people who make vehicles for GM and Chrysler. But on a more peripheral level, the company I work for is a data company that provides data to GM and Chrysler as our main clientele. Although, from a different point of view, the market should sustain itself even in the absence of GM and Chrysler. The foreign manufacturers will still need data management and regional manufacturing plants. There will still be jobs making cars, but the proceeds will go overseas. Which spans a broader issue of the United States losing economic grasp over the world. It is at risk of losing all of its power to foreign interests by losing at the game of global capitalism. Moral intuition and a democratic government seem to be holding the US back when battling China on the economic world stage. All the more reason to have endless war, military equipment, bombs and ammunition is possibly the largest US market. The nice thing about the military industrial complex is the ability to create economic demand through the declaration of war. Who knows what would become of the US economy if they had to sustain peace for an extended period of time.

lol mensa,

it was a joke you don't have to apologize for anything :)

Its like Animus says. Economics. Creation of logical weapons as thoughtforms. The ultimate crystallization of currency as a wire for administration. Money in multitude produces a white band of current. Upon this band, there is a lot of A4. Hooked-on to this A4; there are a lot of individuals who hang themselves. You can almost see this. A4. An "A" and a "4". It is almost if these symbols are alive. A could stand for "Administered" and 4 could stand for a cube wherein an individual operates the suicide machine. This points to different strategies available in decision-making and optimization. Economics in general looks for the best strategy. Game theory could provide models in conjunction with optimization theory and decision-making could point to general systems theory. But a big problem presented itself with the rise of technology. Humans cannot survive their biological grow because of the technological curve. Therefore specialization can only lead only to an increase of involution. However, today most politicians have had enough of their own disgust. They can't keep up. Of course one could always specialize him or herself in generalization. But this strategy uses specialization against itself. Technology compared to scarcity pushes the lines to an implosion. Technology has to expand cyberspace or else humanity is complete history. With the advent of superstring theory and cryptography, in conjunction with quantummechanics; this produced a lot of new systems. There are very powerful computers operating at this moment. The big turn of humanity comes unexpectedly. Humanity moves "inwardly" and the individuals cannot see this. Economy will be reflected inwardly because of the most pertinent reason that defines economics itself. They have no choice. But when this is done, a big part of the net will be annihilated because of some very unforeseen circumstances...

Logic to me is critical thinking that is there and it just needs to be picked up. For example, Good and Bad (using the broadest terms), of which is predisposed in every living thing yet we wouldn't know unless we did something or saw something of that nature happen, like hurting someone, if we get attacked "logic" tells us what to do.

Through logic you can realize things about yourself and the environment you live in and how it is affecting you, this is how I prevailed in overcoming my autistic properties and gaining logical knowledge which helps purport me to a status of self-awareness regardless of my education level in school.

Hai Kim wrote:Logic to me is critical thinking that is there and it just needs to be picked up. For example, Good and Bad (using the broadest terms), of which is predisposed in every living thing yet we wouldn't know unless we did something or saw something of that nature happen, like hurting someone, if we get attacked "logic" tells us what to do.

http://twitter.com/GiftsOfAutism/status/10524741580

Autism = nonlinear thinking = nonlinear logic.

I also think more autists should become aware of this. Often the problem lies in identification with the wrong models because individuals residing in the autism spectrum tend to have most of their energy focused on the development of 1 skill. This identification could be a function that lacks the distributive property. The result in an autist then expresses itself with the emergent property of strong isomorphy functors operating on a categorical level. Solutions to the categorical paradoxes rising in high bandtwidth's of the defined, could lie in homologies and cohomologies. This is an advanced level of nonlinear partial differentiation; functionally analyzed by the powerful focus of an autist his or her brain (roughly described). If most ordinary things in the world are linearly represented, then the problem is presented as a differentiated world. Most educated people in this world tend to reduce things. Autists don't like it unless they can appreciate linear algebra; the best understood subject in the mathematical field.

Manatron wrote:

Hai Kim wrote:Logic to me is critical thinking that is there and it just needs to be picked up. For example, Good and Bad (using the broadest terms), of which is predisposed in every living thing yet we wouldn't know unless we did something or saw something of that nature happen, like hurting someone, if we get attacked "logic" tells us what to do.

http://twitter.com/GiftsOfAutism/status/10524741580

Autism = nonlinear thinking = nonlinear logic.

I also think more autists should become aware of this. Often the problem lies in identification with the wrong models because individuals residing in the autism spectrum tend to have most of their energy focused on the development of 1 skill. This identification could be a function that lacks the distributive property. The result in an autist then expresses itself with the emergent property of strong isomorphy functors operating on a categorical level. Solutions to the categorical paradoxes rising in high bandtwidth's of the defined, could lie in homologies and cohomologies. This is an advanced level of nonlinear partial differentiation; functionally analyzed by the powerful focus of an autist his or her brain (roughly described). If most ordinary things in the world are linearly represented, then the problem is presented as a differentiated world. Most educated people in this world tend to reduce things. Autists don't like it unless they can appreciate linear algebra; the best understood subject in the mathematical field.

You are absolutely right from a observers stand point, but then again from my experience it is NOT the brain that is wired differently but rather the wires connected to the brain are damaged and degenerating throughout time without proper rehabilitation. Autism, asperger's, bi-polar, schizophrenia, depression, anger, etc. are all varying degrees of mental health disorder with autism/schizophrenia being an extreme case and emotional/mood distress being mild, or so I theorize from my sense of logic.

Hai Kim wrote:You are absolutely right from a observers stand point, but then again from my experience it is NOT the brain that is wired differently but rather the wires connected to the brain are damaged and degenerating throughout time without proper rehabilitation. Autism, asperger's, bi-polar, schizophrenia, depression, anger, etc. are all varying degrees of mental health disorder with autism/schizophrenia being an extreme case and emotional/mood distress being mild, or so I theorize from my sense of logic.

Do you have any proof that schizophrenia itself for example, is degenerative...it could cause anger and this in turn will damage cells, but in this case it would be the anger that is the poison injector, not the schizophrenia or the autism i think. One could say while being correct: If schizophrenia causes anger, and anger causes poison, then schizophrenia causes poison...but this would only mean that SPIRIT is left out of the picture. SPIRIT in this case is not the transitive property.

Manatron wrote:

Hai Kim wrote:You are absolutely right from a observers stand point, but then again from my experience it is NOT the brain that is wired differently but rather the wires connected to the brain are damaged and degenerating throughout time without proper rehabilitation. Autism, asperger's, bi-polar, schizophrenia, depression, anger, etc. are all varying degrees of mental health disorder with autism/schizophrenia being an extreme case and emotional/mood distress being mild, or so I theorize from my sense of logic.

Do you have any proof that schizophrenia itself for example, is degenerative...it could cause anger and this in turn will damage cells, but in this case it would be the anger that is the poison injector, not the schizophrenia or the autism i think. One could say while being correct: If schizophrenia causes anger, and anger causes poison, then schizophrenia causes poison...but this would only mean that SPIRIT is left out of the picture. SPIRIT in this case is not the transitive property.

I cannot substantiate my findings on one individual, so no I do not have "proof" (yet) but it is a speculative theory that has viability to becoming real once I have done my research and conclude with end data. Any issues that are not healthy to the body itself is causing the body to degenerate in some way or form if not treated properly, whether its physical or mental. Cause and effect.

Hai Kim wrote:I cannot substantiate my findings on one individual, so no I do not have "proof" (yet) but it is a speculative theory that has viability to becoming real once I have done my research and conclude with end data.

Any issues that are not healthy to the body itself is causing the body to degenerate in some way or form if not treated properly, whether its physical or mental. Cause and effect.

Have you considered the issue of the effects of anti-psychotics ? Let me motivate this frame through a real-life event based on these outcomes of which i have been informed:

Person A was once a sportsman and today person A is being diagnosed as a schizophrenic. Life becomes too much for person A and he starts seeking some way to escape the reality that is being imposed. Person A will begin with booze. Meanwhile, some psychiatrist is prescribing person A some drugs. The psychiatrist tells person A that drinking alcohol is allowed, but too much alcohol is out of the question. Three years pass by. Person A is taking his medications as prescribed; thus the prescribed. Meanwhile, person A regressed because of some environmental issues like social trouble and psychological trouble. Person A feels more stable and he expresses it towards the authorities, compared to four years ago, but his goals seem not to reach him. Person A has dreams or a purpose (this purpose could be very simple like walking from # to #' to use his hands for some operation) but it seems that there is some trouble with most of the muscles. A few days later person A finds that after eating one egg; the liver hurts. But, at some instances in the past person A profited from the drugs by coming to one idea that could change; whole life. Person A wants to become a journalist in the field of his past. But, person A finds that his intellect has dissappeared, his motorics exhibit "shock waves", his muscles announce these "shock waves" by a warning of contraction, like as if these are alive of error, but his clarity remains where "clarity" has nothing to do with intellect and reason nor environmental issues.

Do you think person A should stop the medication or could there be a very serious danger in stopping the medication if it this is done ?


On the other hand, i also get the impression that you are implying the crux of medical endeavours namely; the cure, when you say that some body degenerates after which a proof could be beneficial.

But i think that pharmaceutical approaches are more harmful than autism itself and i don't think that the current kinds of treatments are healthy. I could go look for facts and proofs and collect a lot of them, so that the opposite camp could collect a lot of counter examples and prove the contrary but, these games are also harmful. I don't want to sound pessimistic, but certain trends in this world are the cause of hightened awareness like autists share and i am not talking about hard drugs or soft drugs but of mind software or dogma. This is a fact.
A lot of hate is also being promoted using these kinds of arguments, but that is not my point here. If there has to be any progress in medicine, then cognitivity and perception have to be relatively fully understood, and not mere the biological processes. One can say that the interrelations between these two fields are being studied, but how can this be if cognition is the problem of the century in the first place ?

Manatron wrote:

Hai Kim wrote:I cannot substantiate my findings on one individual, so no I do not have "proof" (yet) but it is a speculative theory that has viability to becoming real once I have done my research and conclude with end data.

Any issues that are not healthy to the body itself is causing the body to degenerate in some way or form if not treated properly, whether its physical or mental. Cause and effect.

Have you considered the issue of the effects of anti-psychotics ? Let me motivate this frame through a real-life event based on these outcomes of which i have been informed:

Person A was once a sportsman and today person A is being diagnosed as a schizophrenic. Life becomes too much for person A and he starts seeking some way to escape the reality that is being imposed. Person A will begin with booze. Meanwhile, some psychiatrist is prescribing person A some drugs. The psychiatrist tells person A that drinking alcohol is allowed, but too much alcohol is out of the question. Three years pass by. Person A is taking his medications as prescribed; thus the prescribed. Meanwhile, person A regressed because of some environmental issues like social trouble and psychological trouble. Person A feels more stable and he expresses it towards the authorities, compared to four years ago, but his goals seem not to reach him. Person A has dreams or a purpose (this purpose could be very simple like walking from # to #' to use his hands for some operation) but it seems that there is some trouble with most of the muscles. A few days later person A finds that after eating one egg; the liver hurts. But, at some instances in the past person A profited from the drugs by coming to one idea that could change; whole life. Person A wants to become a journalist in the field of his past. But, person A finds that his intellect has dissappeared, his motorics exhibit "shock waves", his muscles announce these "shock waves" by a warning of contraction, like as if these are alive of error, but his clarity remains where "clarity" has nothing to do with intellect and reason nor environmental issues.

Do you think person A should stop the medication or could there be a very serious danger in stopping the medication if it this is done ?


On the other hand, i also get the impression that you are implying the crux of medical endeavours namely; the cure, when you say that some body degenerates after which a proof could be beneficial.

But i think that pharmaceutical approaches are more harmful than autism itself and i don't think that the current kinds of treatments are healthy. I could go look for facts and proofs and collect a lot of them, so that the opposite camp could collect a lot of counter examples and prove the contrary but, these games are also harmful. I don't want to sound pessimistic, but certain trends in this world are the cause of hightened awareness like autists share and i am not talking about hard drugs or soft drugs but of mind software or dogma. This is a fact.
A lot of hate is also being promoted using these kinds of arguments, but that is not my point here. If there has to be any progress in medicine, then cognitivity and perception have to be relatively fully understood, and not mere the biological processes. One can say that the interrelations between these two fields are being studied, but how can this be if cognition is the problem of the century in the first place ?

You placed me between a rock and a hard place with your catch 22 question, but ultimately if this person wants to live a longer healthier life and reverse the effects through rehabilitation reform, he/she has to ultimately want it for him/herself. You cannot rehabilitate person A without person A wanting to change, and any drug (pharmaceutical, illegal, etc.) would only create more problems by having their brain "think" they are feeling better but in reality it does nothing to help the body, which is where the cause lies.

Pharmaceutical drugs do have a place in society, I am not discouraging any type of drug because they do have their advantages in certain situations, not all, plus there is not enough understanding of drugs to certainly prove that there are no deepening effects in later generations of the family line. Like Charles Darwin theorized the curse of his family line through inbreeding (article here: http://www.livescience.com/history/char ... 00503.html), we have to take in to account the same measures for ourselves with pharmaceutical drugs since they are "legal", but then again like I said they have their uses that is why it was created...who is to say good or bad? I am not one to judge, both have particulars that feed off each other which is why it was created.

Anyway, rehabilitation reform will not incorporate any drugs (legal/illegal) of which will slow down the process of a true and tried form of rehabilitation, but would use natural health foods advanced with technology to cleanse and eradicate the toxins in the body (all of which would have to be approved by the FDA).

Once I get into medical school I can then let everything I have inside out and at the same time take in vital information to execute the cure, through my research trials I shall end up with hard evidence to substantiate my theory in question.

Hai Kim wrote:You placed me between a rock and a hard place with your catch 22 question, but ultimately if this person wants to live a longer healthier life and reverse the effects through rehabilitation reform, he/she has to ultimately want it for him/herself. You cannot rehabilitate person A without person A wanting to change, and any drug (pharmaceutical, illegal, etc.) would only create more problems by having their brain "think" they are feeling better but in reality it does nothing to help the body, which is where the cause lies.

One cause may lie there. But then again, everybody has different experiences and their thinking content is different, and these images are related in a meaningful way because this person has pictures and thoughts + this person is aware. This means there is a will to live. mechanisms of the brain are not understood fully. If one is to deny the mystery or even the existence of the will to live, then one may well seek their experience in brain surgery. Pharmaceuticals are one thing, and advanced neurology another. But the technological advancement does not mean that everything is understood yet.

Hai Kim wrote:Pharmaceutical drugs do have a place in society, I am not discouraging any type of drug because they do have their advantages in certain situations, not all, plus there is not enough understanding of drugs to certainly prove that there are no deepening effects in later generations of the family line. Like Charles Darwin theorized the curse of his family line through inbreeding (article here: http://www.livescience.com/history/char ... 00503.html), we have to take in to account the same measures for ourselves with pharmaceutical drugs since they are "legal", but then again like I said they have their uses that is why it was created...who is to say good or bad? I am not one to judge, both have particulars that feed off each other which is why it was created.

Pharmaceuticals are not bad in its overall sense. It is like when you say some extremeties in the autism spectrum are being tackled. There are more schizophrenics than autists, but if one really wants to differentiate between these two, then it is proved that schizophrenics are more dangerous to society. I am sayin that it has also criminological and even religious implications and this leads to war.

If some current anti-psychotics on the market are kept active, like seroquel, then more people might die. People actually died from seroquel and i tried one myself for the experience. I don't think these medications have quite positive effects because it seemed to me like if there was thrown a heavy burning carpet over my body while walking and this carpet gently dissolved in burning heat throughout my body..it was directed diffusion to the physical heart....at the culmination point, something went seriously wrong (i bended half through my knees be-cause of a shock which was felt right in the heart originating from behind the brain...i could feel the nerve from the part to my brain to the heart for an instant in light shock...but i managed myself ok..i thought jeez...what would have happened if i took a half-one instead of one quarter of that pill. If the initial effects are potentially "heart failure" then something is wrong. It was a scandal when this came out. This scares some groups of people in the area. These "diseases" are more harmful and this is also clear if you just turn your head in a page in history; something got messed up because of pharmaceuticals. Ritalin (which is not an anti-psychotic) has killed 180 children between 1990 and 2000. But then again, pharma has also produced good things and one can go on summing up the cases...plus...minus....plus...minus and so on. Too-heavy medication is not that good because it exists in an experimental function mis-using the exponential function.

Hai Kim wrote:Anyway, rehabilitation reform will not incorporate any drugs (legal/illegal) of which will slow down the process of a true and tried form of rehabilitation, but would use natural health foods advanced with technology to cleanse and eradicate the toxins in the body (all of which would have to be approved by the FDA). Once I get into medical school I can then let everything I have inside out and at the same time take in vital information to execute the cure, through my research trials I shall end up with hard evidence to substantiate my theory in question.

Natural health foods...if one may discover some new plant with interesting medicinal properties then this may be combined in a beneficial chemical synthesis. This new kind of inbreeding uses group theory and loves symmetry. Once this field is mastered, one can breed as many elements as necessary. Chemistry. I recall an ancient formula that was once interpreted in the spirit of some gods and inbreeding...now there are chemical elements.