Thoughts on the Humanities and Liberalism

I want to express another thought which underlies much of my political thinking.

As I said on my Face Book Page, regarding religion:

Religion is basically the search for and discovery of truth. Once found it becomes true for that person. And if it serves as stable datum of a person’s very existence it becomes sacred to him. Rights to one’s religious convictions and practices are worth fighting for. Any attempt to block another’s religious convictions or any attempt to degrade them is a nasty business and is practiced by the most selfish and myopic of  people. Government should never condone or support any religion – other than to assure its inherent right to exist. This goes for all religions, including psychology.

I also quoted Lazarus Long, who said:

“The Human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire”.

The decline of many elements of our nation (and to some extent the world) which include education, the family, the obfuscation of concepts of  right and wrong, the staggering number of kids on psych drugs are directly related to the government sponsered growth of the religious cult of psychology and a resulting attitude of liberalism. (I use the word cult as defined as, “Followers of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices” and do not mean it in a pejorative sense). Psychology, a religion, is condoned and supported by government and pervades institutions of “higher” learning – especially the humanities students. This religion is promoted by government,  by government-supported institutions and by media and is a direct afront to the tenet that government should not support any religion. (As a side, do not fall for the idea that psychology is a science – it is not. It is fraught with opinions, differing conclusions and lacks the simplest capabilities to predict system reactions and behaviors;  criteria that are required in the realm of physical science. The word “psych” means spirit. In my dictionary from 1884 psychology is defined as “the study of the human spirit”. Today  not only does psychology lack clear and measurable consensus, it can’t even define itself.)

Now, I do not intend to degrade psychology itself. It, as a religion, deserves the same treatment as any religion. We need to be clear, however, that it IS a religion. The reason psychology has become dangerous is because it has been falsely given the mantle of science to gain worshipers from a people who worship science and then has gained dominance;  not by its merit but by its promotion and funding by government and other major institutions.

We like to believe we are free in this country to express our ideas and to have independent thoughts. However, one should understand the philosophy of Scholasticism, which dominated in the Middle Ages, and continues today, mostly in America. This philosophy bases education of Americans not upon increasing competence and ability and freedom to think and create ideas, but upon the adherence to already established ideas and data of past authorities. This is not as true in the materials and physical sciences as it is in the humanities – thus the measurable successes in those fields. Direct “looking” is not condoned in the humanties and humanity degrees are given for the ability to recite and discuss already established thought. In the humanities, a thesis will be mostly based upon the earlier thoughts of others and be based upon very little original creative thought. In fact, if one injects a creative thought into a thesis he will usually be shot down by words like (what is your citation?). This makes most “educated” folks in the humanities burdened by unevaluated (by them) data (from “authorities”) that they do not truly own themselves – and thus makes them ineffective with respect to that data. It is an amazing thing to see the self-duping that goes on in the field of humanities – not unlike the proverbial (and eliged) “how many angels on the head of a pin” arguments of the past.

Unfortunately these folks seek control of others because they tend to believe they are elite (part of an “educated” club) and have the ability and insight which puts them in a position, by right and providence (one might think), to control others. Again, this is fueled by funds from a government fearful of its people and wanting any means of control it can purchase and promote.

And this is a basis of liberalism.

Psychology and Sociology may have intrinsic value to those who follow them. But degrees in those subjects have value only to government and establishment, which finances the indoctrination of an elite group and then forces,  through laws made by these trained elite, unnatural and unwanted doctrines and doctrine-guided mechanisms the down the peoples’ throats to control them. The only other “value” to such a degrees is to “teach”  others (and there is nothing wrong with that).

So those that want people (other than they, themselves) be to be controlled will be found to be elitists with a false sense of insight based upon false principles. They do not fear control – as long as it comes from them.