Understanding Our Minds

Understand this a "Long hard Journey", yet that it builds upon it's self,once you understand one thing,it leads to next,Desire.

for example: 1.

 I consider myself -  with Eccentricity (behavior)


Psychologist David Weeks believes people with a mental illness "suffer" from their behavior,    while eccentrics are quite happy.[7][8] He even states eccentrics are less prone to mental illness than everyone else.

According to Weeks' study, there are several distinctive characteristics that often differentiate a healthy eccentric person from a regular person or someone who has a mental illness. The first five characteristics on Weeks' list are found in most people regarded as eccentric:[7]  

I try to be the following

  • Enduring non-conformity
  • Creative
  • Strongly motivated by an exceedingly powerful curiosity and related exploratory behaviour
  • An enduring and distinct feeling of differentness from others
  • Idealism in the sense of wanting to make the world a better place and the people in it happier[9]

2. I consider myself "psychologically "Third gender Fem-male"

3. very empathtic

Aim is to become "Psychologically Whole",...Come out of "Plato's Cave"

To even Start the Journey of "Liberation from Self " one has to " Holistically",or completely, become Honest,(Truth) to understand the Ego in one's Mind,how the ego will hold one from learning ,whom one is a "Human Being"

How Ego is very much influenced by "Group Think "

One has to be willing to become a true "Individual",free as much as possible from "Group Think" ,thus "Pre-Concieved Notions"

"A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison (Plato's Cave) by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.

- Albert Einstein

Social construction

The basic assumptions of social constructionism, as described by Marecek, Crawford & Popp,[4] are:

  1. Social constructionism is a theory of knowledge. Social constructionism focuses on how meaning is created. Emerging from the criticism of objectivity, social constructionism challenges concepts of knowledge put forward by positivism, which postulates the externality of reality and that empirically-proved truths are mind-independent.[5] According to Marecek, Crawford & Popp, knowledge is an "account of reality produced collaboratively by a community of knowers"[4] Thus, social constructionism focuses on how meaning is created.
  2. Knowledge is a social product. According to Marecek, Crawford & Popp, knowledge is an "account of reality produced collaboratively by a community of knowers".[4] Thus, social constructionists focus on how meaning is created and suggest that knowledge is not only a social product, but a product of a specifically situated society; various accounts of reality depend on place and time – in order to study knowledge as a social product, one has to historicize and contextualize the given description of reality.
  3. Power and hierarchy underlie social construction. This focus results in showing how individuals differ in status, entitlement, efficacy, self-respect and other traits based on the kind of interactions one is involved in and subjected to.
  4. Language is at the core of knowledge. Language is considered the building block of culture; it conveys meaning and creates the system of knowledge humans participate in. Ultimately, language has a huge influence on how humans perceive reality and, as a result, is the creator of this reality.
  5. Social construction is a dynamic process. Social constructionists emphasize the complexity of how knowledge is created in social interactions. Knowledge and meanings are not stable or constant; they are co-constructed in interactions with others, negotiated, modified and shifted. People are active in their perception, understanding and sharing of knowledge acquired from their social milieu. It is prudent therefore to consider this process when explaining the social construction of knowledge, including knowledge concerning gender.
  6. The individual and society are indissoluble. Social constructionists question the Western idea of an autonomous individual who can draw a clear line between the self and the society. According to social constructionism, individuals can create meaning only in relation to what they are exposed to in their environment. Paradoxically, the same individuals co-create the meanings that are available in this environment. Marecek et al. conclude therefore that the society and the individual are indissoluble and mutually constitutive.

I highly recommend ones goes and downs the Mp3 version of "Distractions",study it by listening,paying "Attention",thus understand "Ego " much better.

Alternatives to the Ten Commandments

Understand We as Human Being must get along, yet need no Religions to do that...nearly all are Myths,from the Greek Gods to Christianity,all every one,,there is no way to prove any Myth.this is my Opinion,

Factual we only know we are" Part of a Greater Whole"

Links related to Understand Our Minds,etc.

Dan Gilbert speaks on," End of History ILLusion", I believe this is very much a State that Society is in as a most part.

Excerpts from "Unplug yourself from groupthink":

Groupthink is one of the most insidious aspects of daily life. It is something that almost nobody is consciously aware of, yet extremely pervasive in every institution, social group, political affiliation, and country.

Groupthink is defined as, “The practice of thinking or making decisions as a group in a way that discourages creativity or individual responsibility.” In essence, groupthink occurs when one person (usually unconsciously) adopts another’s opinion because they feel like it makes sense, or just “seems right.” Notice there was no logical analysis of the new opinion, just a blind faith in the opinion because so many other people believe in it.

Groupthink often happens when an inspiring, persuasive leader is present, causing listeners to agree with their opinion. A frightening example of the destructive effects of groupthink is the rule of Adolf Hitler, who convinced a nation of people to commit unspeakable acts of hatred and murder on millions of innocent people. Groupthink was the reason that few people questioned what was going on. If everyone else believed what they were doing was right, then who was one person to disagree with that? How could the vast majority of people be completely wrong?

I see people every single day who affiliate themselves with all the views of their chosen political party without thinking critically about each one. Since they agree on one issue, they decide to agree with all of them without thinking critically about each one. These issues are usually completely unrelated, yet many people adopt all the views that fit within the framework of the label “Democrat” or “Republican.” It’s very rare that I meet someone who, for example, thinks that the environment should be cared for much more than it is now, yet also thinks that abortion is morally wrong, even though those issues, by themselves, are absolutely unrelated.

Take the time to deeply analyze your political, spiritual, and moral beliefs. When I attempted to do this, I realized that many of my long-standing beliefs fell apart because over time I had unintentionally allowed myself to be limited by groupthink. My beliefs were like a tree growing against a wall. The wall was the groupthink, and when I took that out of the equation and just examined the tree by itself, it had nothing of substance to support itself.

It’s very important to challenge your set of beliefs so that you don’t fall prey to groupthink. I personally attempt to cultivate a variety of unique beliefs about close to everything. In terms of political issues, I have strong beliefs about different issues that could be labeled as “very liberal” “very conservative” and “very libertarian.” I have researched each one of these issues, and the best resource I’ve found by far is www.procon.org. This website gives you 10 very credible arguments on each side of the spectrum for each issue, and each argument is well supported by solid facts.

Form your own beliefs about everything in life, by yourself, without letting the influence of your parents, social circle, or others you trust get in the way. There isn’t much of an excuse not to do this, especially as practically all the world’s information is available at your fingertips. Don’t be afraid to hold an unpopular belief. In the words of Mark Twain, “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”-holisticimprovement.com

What are good examples of the groupthink phenomenon?:

One example we studied in class with the Challenger tragedy. The engineers recommended directly that the space shuttle not be launched because of low temperatures that would affect the O-rings. However, the group was more interested in reaching a consensus, and the decision making managers decided to ignore the warnings. Fast forward from 1986 to 2003, and you have the Columbia disaster. Groupthink has quite the impact.

Penn State Cover-Up: Groupthink in Action: The recent, scathing report by former FBI director Louis Freeh detailing the cover-up of child-sexual abuse at the highest levels of Penn State‘s leadership has been parsed a million ways, but the question still remains: How could these intelligent and dedicated men have failed so dramatically to defend young children, while going overboard to protect their public image, their football, their Jerry, their JoePa?

A brief history of groupthink:

psychologist Irving Janis identified eight symptoms of Groupthink:

  • The illusion that the group is invulnerable. This leads group members to ignore obvious dangers, take unwarrantable risks, and be overly optimistic.
  • Collective rationalization, explaining away or discrediting any evidence that contradicts the group’s beliefs.
  • The belief that the group is morally righteous, which leads to the group’s ignoring the moral and ethical consequences of its actions.
  • Negative stereotyping of outsiders, whether barbarians, Democrats, black, white, or the founder of Mensa’s charming “green people with yellow stripes” (the only subgroup of the top two percent categorically unwelcome in Mensa). Fem-male gender!
  • Pressure for conformity, in which dissenters against the group’s stereotypes, illusions, or commitments are seen as disloyal and can even become discredited and ostracized.
  • Self-censorship, in which individual members withhold their doubts, dissenting views, and counterarguments.
  • The illusion of unanimity, in which lack of active objection is equated with consent.
  • Mindguards,” self-appointed Groupthinkers who protect their leaders from doubt, dissension, and adverse information, thus protecting the group’s complacency.

Don't forget,Hilter was a Master at using Groupthink,we know what he did!

Corporations use this,leaders,all people whom seek control and have,materialistic gain,power etc.in mind.

It's tough,very tough to break free of this groupthink,since birth we are programed to it by parents,teachers,leaders.whom they themselves are programed to it,yet we must try to break this form of Pre-Concieved Notion.

Compassion fatigue, also known as secondary traumatic stress (STS), is a condition characterized by a gradual lessening of compassion over time. It is common among individuals that work directly with trauma victims such as therapists (paid and unpaid), nurses, teachers, psychologists, police officers, paramedics, emergency medical technicians (EMTs), firefighters, animal welfare workers, health unit coordinators and anyone who helps out others, especially family members, relatives, and other informal caregivers of patients suffering from a chronic illness.[1] It was first diagnosed in nurses in the 1950s.

Sufferers can exhibit several symptoms including hopelessness, a decrease in experiences of pleasure, constant stress and anxiety, sleeplessness or nightmares, and a pervasive negative attitude. This can have detrimental effects on individuals, both professionally and personally, including a decrease in productivity, the inability to focus, and the development of new feelings of incompetency and self-doubt.[2]

Journalism analysts argue that the media has caused widespread compassion fatigue in society by saturating newspapers and news shows with often decontextualized images and stories of tragedy and suffering. This has caused the public to become desensitized and/or resistant to helping people who are suffering

Apathy is a lack of feeling, emotion, interest, and concern. Apathy is a state of indifference, or the suppression of emotions such as concern, excitement, motivation, or passion. An apathetic individual has an absence of interest in or concern about emotional, social, spiritual, philosophical, or physical life and the world.

The apathetic may lack a sense of purpose, worth, or meaning in their life. An apathetic person may also exhibit insensibility or sluggishness. In positive psychology, apathy is described as a result of the individuals feeling they do not possess the level of skill required to confront a challenge (i.e. "flow"). It may also be a result of perceiving no challenge at all (e.g. the challenge is irrelevant to them, or conversely, they have learned helplessness). Apathy may be a sign of more specific mental problems such as schizophrenia or dementia. However, apathy is something that all people face in some capacity. It is a natural response to disappointment, dejection, and stress. As a response, apathy is a way to forget about these negative feelings.[citation needed] This type of common apathy is usually only felt in the short-term and when it becomes a long-term or even lifelong state is when deeper social and psychological issues are most likely present.

Apathy should be distinguished from reduced affect, which refers to reduced emotional expression but not necessarily reduced emotion.

Excerpt from Mirrored Emotion:

DECETY FIRST PLUMBED THE MEANING of human empathy reading the work of 18th-century Scottish philosophers. They were among the earliest, he says, to dissect empathy and altruism. David Hume wrote that people’s minds mirrored one another; Hume’s teacher Francis Hutcheson recast the ancient idea of sensus communis as a universal inclination to be happy for others’ happiness and “uneasy at their misery.” Economist and ethicist Adam Smith described a similar “fellow-feeling” in The Theory of the Moral Sentiments, a best seller that secured his fortune and proved the making of his career. “When we see a stroke aimed and just ready to fall upon the leg or arm of another person, we naturally shrink and draw back our own leg or our own arm,” Smith wrote, “and when it does fall we feel it.” Merely imagining the plight of “our brother upon the rack,” meanwhile, was enough to make one “enter as it were into his body, and become in some measure the same person with him.”

Decety’s research bears out much of what Scottish Enlightenment thinkers perceived, even without the benefit of fMRI. “One of the most crucial aspects of human nature is that we are social animals,” he says. “We need others for food, shelter, protection, sex, yes. But it is more than that. We need others all the time.” Not starvation and disease, but loneliness, exile, and abandonment, he says, induce the greatest human suffering. Expressing pain—from a broken leg or a broken heart—betrays weakness, but it also calls others to offer comfort. “If you go on a solitary walk, you take other people with you,” he says. “In human society, empathy is the glue,” pulling individuals’ separate paths into orbits of shared, if temporary, feeling.


Certainty is perfect knowledge that has total security from error, or the mental state of being without doubt.

Objectively defined, certainty is total continuity and validity of all foundational inquiry, to the highest degree of precision. Something is certain only if no skepticism can occur. Philosophy

Pyrrho – ancient Greece

Pyrrho is credited as being the first Skeptic philosopher. The main principle of Pyrrho's thought is expressed by the word acatalepsia, which denotes the ability to withhold assent from doctrines regarding the truth of things in their own nature; against every statement its contradiction may be advanced with equal justification. Secondly, it is necessary in view of this fact to preserve an attitude of intellectual suspense, or, as Timon expressed it, no assertion can be known to be better than another.