Learning to Think

The Mindset of Independence

At some point in time, everyone has felt a spark of enlightenment when a novel idea momentarily penetrates the imposing barricades of prejudice and groupthink. However, the spark usually dies mere moments after its birth, since it is hard work to think and most people would rather not bother. To quote Bertrand Russell: "Most people would rather die than think; in fact, they do so."

This is not the case with those rare individuals who somehow kept that spark alive and fanned it just a little bit brighter. Perhaps it was the way they were feeling one day. Maybe they were stuck somewhere with a book they otherwise wouldn't take the time to read. Possibly they were influenced by a charismatic and persuasive speaker who seized their imagination.

For whatever reason, they began considering things that most other people wouldn't. Despite all the ignorance and learned "knowledge" around them, they brought forth new ideas and new interpretations of old ideas. They looked at the world about them in fresh ways. They rejected the obvious and known and looked for the subtle and unknown. And within, they discovered how to look into their own minds' and studied the content inside as if it were a new and rare animal.

With these actions, that little spark grew larger and hotter and fiercer, burning away mental walls that had lasted a lifetime and freeing the mind for greater and deeper thought. And in the minds of the greatest thinkers, that spark ignited into a bonfire that laid waste to the all-encompassing cultural hypnosis that still paralyzes virtually all members of society.

Objectiveness is always the result of this new mindset; "fully integrated intellectual honesty" would be a more sophisticated way of saying it. But the essential facts are that someone who has truly learned to think has succeeded -- to one degree or another -- in removing mental obstacles to clear, logical, and unbiased thinking.

"Normal" people who rely on others find those mental walls as imposing as impregnable armoured fortifications. But the same barriers are weak and small in the mind of a thinker. It is merely a matter of perception, and what has changed that perception in the mind of a thinker is the hard work performed to "de-energize" the walls until they lose their mentally coercive powers.

That the boundaries exist in the first place is no accident. They are there for a reason. Governments and religions could not survive in their present form without the authoritative "mysticism" they have used to poison free-thinking and creative individuals. The mass hypnosis of conventional society is by design because it is of enormous benefit to those who would rule over others.

A free thinker has learned to see this and it is always a solitary effort. There is no official support for a course or program that teaches people to be independent of their political and theological masters.

So how does such learning occur? It comes from the ability to ask questions, not the ability to memorize answers (as is the case in our government-sponsored education systems). Let's illustrate this with some examples.

Q1: Why do we pay taxes?
Q2: Why do we fight wars?
Q3: Why does [insert any law] exist?
Q4: Who is more concerned about my personal welfare: myself or someone else?

The answers are not as clear-cut as many people would have you believe. Anyone spending a good thirty minutes considering any one of the above issues (use a stopwatch to time yourself) will inevitably be led to more and more profound questions. The domino effect teaches and inspires, and the end result is that some fundamental truths will be uncovered.

Here's an example, using "stock" answers from a non-thinker gradually forced to think:

• Q: Why do we pay taxes?
• A: Because we have to support our country.

• Q: Why do we have to support our country?
• A: Because our country is the best one there is.

• Q: How do you know that?
• A: Because I read it in the paper and saw it on television.

• Q: OK, but then what criteria makes our country the best?
• A: Democracy, freedom of choice, wealth, quality of health care and education, and so on.

• Q: Which is most important to you?
• A: [Insert custom answer here. Almost certainly it will be the one that benefits the recipient the most. People are always self-interested creatures. No salesman has ever sold a product or service on vague ideals (e.g. democracy). It is always benefits (e.g. health care, education, etc.) that make the sale. For the sake of argument, let's say the answer was "health care"]

• Q: Is the tax money you pay spent wisely on health care?
• A: Well, it could be better, I guess. In fact, just last week [insert health care gripe here]. They just need more money to make the system work right.

• Q: Who told you that?
• A: I read it in the paper and saw it on television. Then again, I keep reading about the waste and inefficiency. Maybe a new political party will reform the system and make it better.

• Q: OK. But going beyond reform, what if there was a cheaper, more effective health care system that would cost you less money and give you better services?
• A: I don't believe it - that sounds too good to be true. The government has to run the industry or it will become based on profits, not on need. I keep hearing about how bad private health care is. It's an essential need and-

• Q: But aren't your grocery store and local bank profit based? And aren't they providing essential services?
• A: Well, yes, but that's different.

• Q: How is it different?
• A: Because if I don't like the way Store A or Bank B does business, I can go somewhere else. At a hospital, I can't... Hey, wait a minute!

• Q: I think you're catching on. Competition is good for consumers, isn't it?
• A: Yes, but - but health care is special. If there was competition, hospitals would be about profits, not caring.

• Q: Does your local bank care about you?
• A: Of course not. But they want my business, so they're nice to me.

• Q: How do they get (and keep) your business?
• A: Well, by giving me the services I want, at prices I like, and making me feel important. But you can't make health care run that way!

• Q: Why not? Give me some good reasons.
• A: Well, because that's just the way it works... oh, I know! A private health care system would only benefit the rich. If I-

• Q: Do bankers only serve the rich?
• A: Of course not. There's bankers for the rich and bankers for people like me. But you can't do that with health care. I deserve health care that's as good as that available to anyone else. If a bad hospital ripped me off, I could be out thousands of dollars and sick for life.

• Q: Why doesn't your bank - which obviously caters to people like you - try ripping you off?
• A: Because I'd take them to court. And anyway, if I heard a lot of bad publicity about them, I'd take my business elsewhere.

• Q: But if you're happy with the bank that services you, why is it so different with a health care provider?
• A: You're ignoring the fact I could get really sick at a bad hospital or clinic!

• Q: That's possible. But do publicly-funded hospitals never make mistakes and always provide perfect care?
• A: Uh, no. Why, just last week I heard about that scandal at-

• Q: So why would free-enterprise be such a bad thing for hospitals and the health care system in general?
• A: I dunno, it just is. It doesn't make a lot of sense right now, but...

• Q: Wouldn't free-enterprise competition be a benefit to you in many, many ways, just like banking services, groceries, department stores, and just about anything else you need in life?
• A: Hmmm... Well, you've got me stumped now. But I'm sure there's something wrong somewhere in this line of thought, because I've always heard the opposite... Aha - now I've got it! If your thinking is correct, shouldn't we be allowing this already?

• Q: I'm the one asking questions! Why do YOU think we're not doing it?
• A: Hmm... Because the government doesn't like it, maybe?

• Q: Why don't they like it?
• A: Because it would make them look really bad to be so wrong. And it would reduce their tax revenues if we weren't forced to subsidize their system... Wait a minute! Why should I care about them? If I'm paying for health care, I want the best available out there. Maybe we SHOULD try something new.

• Q: Now you're thinking!
• A: Thanks! Maybe I should try this more often...

And once you're enlightened enough to realize that the supposed "authorities" are more of hindrance than a help to free-thinkers (in any topic you care to name, not just health care), you're ready to take the next step. This means putting words (and thoughts) into action. This means taking your welfare into your own hands.

Your welfare always revolves around your money, because your money determines your environment and lifestyle. It might not buy you love, but it can buy you pretty much anything else on this planet, including freedom and independence. And you already know that no one cares more about your money than you. Not your family, not your friends, and certainly not the government.

Taking control of your life, money, business, etc. is the next logical step. It's the ultimate expression of independence. Why let "authorities" try to tell you what you should do with your personal ticket to freedom?

Disclaimer - Copyright - Contact

Online: buildfreedom.org - terrorcrat.com - mind-trek.com