How the Ability to Think Has Lost Its Way in America

How the ability to Think has lost its way in America
Plus, A Few Examples of the Sickly State of Critical Thinking in the United States

By ABH Alexander

Thomas Paine wrote about Common Sense to inspire an active pursuit of liberty, freedom in our first American Revolution. Today we are advised with a sense of humor in our email bins that Common Sense is dead. Even though the appropriate headstone is usually sent along with that email, there have only been attempts to kill it, apparently the seeds are sprouting anew.

How does the average person begin to understand what has been skillfully and deceptively thrown at them over the last hundred or so years? Before the death of common sense, the process of critical thinking needed to be put asleep. In America it has slumbered for a great number of years and in the past twenty years it is stirring.

Within this article you will begin to come to grips with a few of the following questions: Do we really know all we need to know about making a decision on any issue? Are there those who have studied human psychology and the art of manipulation enough to know how to trigger people into making the wrong decisions? Do we really believe as a people we are getting all the information properly presented in the mainstream press or by the government to know the best path? How can we better arm ourselves to weed through the mis and disinformation?

The goal of this article is to help you better understand the process of arriving at that lofty plateau of feeling comfortable with understanding an issue, hopefully to make a correct decision. These are life issues for you and your family and the future demands you take care of the brains that make choices.

When it comes to the correct tool for any choice use critical thinking to help make the decision. Do not make that decision first and use critical thinking to back it up, otherwise you'll end up being a deceiving propagandist or worse, a spin doctor!

Before we take our first step consider how all our lives are tied together in so many ways that even the worst dumbed-down decision maker can effect those whose prudence and careful thought get better results. Watch an episode of Worlds Dumbest, Jackass or a Senate Committee Hearing on CSPAN to get an idea of what is out on the street, now that's scary.

Take a step toward Critical Thinking for a More Informed America.

Your first step, take a good look in the mirror. The higher the education or position in either the academic or corporate world may increase difficulty with critical thinking. As Mark Twain said, "Never let education get in the way of knowledge". Assuming you no longer need to continue your studies outside your immediate needs of your chosen profession will drastically limit your growth. Make time to challenge yourself about your assumptions, unless you are just smarter than everybody else you have ever met.

Now ask the question, "Am I capable of critical thinking?" Your ego and belief in your knowledge will automatically filter out information and inhibit critical thinking. Do you have assumptions you can't and will not change?

This is not to say you should be an empty vessel and accept everything only that you could be missing the boat on the next big thing because you have to wait until everyone in your bubble of influence is ready to take that step. Leaders employ critical thinking quicker and will make the right choice, or not. It may be a class thing, a religious conviction or the effect of influence by politics, science or media that short circuit's pursuit of individual critical thinking.

Among the many learned people in the world one commonality that is often voiced is, ay, "the more I know the more I know I don't know". Even our third President Thomas Jefferson said, "He who knows best, knows how little he knows". This is a serious step toward learning and strong step toward critical thinking. Honesty with oneself and managing your own ego are healthy steps in any case.

Do take a measure of pride in your accomplishments; just remind yourself that with critical thinking resolutely applied will it lead you to new exciting places. Be certain to stay focused on what matters most in your search. You may find old teachings and assumptions not adequate to cover the new information now available; providing you are searching for it in the first place.

Fortunately, in the United States and much of the world, apparently only basic or partial command of critical thinking is necessary to be financially successful.

Accuracy and being precise will go a long way to clarify what you say or write. It may be deceptive and not accurate to say those people are anti-government, when what they are protesting is not the government but very specific corruption within it. Unless of course, you want to grow up to become another hack journalist or a spin doctor.

Perhaps this will be much like our ancestors who had to wrestle with the church for nearly four hundred years before it was generally accepted that the Earth was not the center of the universe and it actually rotated around the Sun. Remember in the early twentieth century when the scientists of the day said that any device heavier then air could never fly. That was until the Wright brothers proved them wrong and began to understand aerodynamics and lift. Can we really believe today that space is too vast to travel? The late Carl Sagan, noted Astronomer and mouthpiece for the SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence) often made that claim. Sagan also was quick to promote his answer as a radio astronomy project which involved sending radio waves into space, which in turn would be answered by intelligent life just waiting for a call. Allegedly no reply has ever been officially announced by SETI. Since rocket ships can't be built big enough to go at the speed of light, just send radio signals and back his project. The grand assumption here is that there is no evidence of technology that bypasses that limitation, responses from deep space in other ways and the lack of desire among mankind to explore other solar systems and galaxies. Today good arguments can be made proving Sagan wrong on all accounts, but then that is another talk show entirely. It is also a good test for budding critical thinkers.

If you have now faced down that man in the mirror than proceed to a check list of your own current beliefs, with the exception of one, your personal faith.

Faith of any flavor does not require vast substantiation in facts and detailed historical support. A belief in a higher power, a God or whatever can be used to benefit as well as plague many. Sure, the Bill Mahr's of the world seem to rejoice in renouncing religion and faith and want to subject it to critical thinking. If you have witnessed a few of Mahr's anti-Christian tirades in interviews he seems a little angry about religion.
Applying critical thinking to faith or religion is difficult because the logic of science has always fallen short of being able to deal with non-physical entities. There has been much written in many texts from around the world and finding the answer to this mystery may not be a simple task, even with critical thinking.

This brings us to another critical thinking tip. Listen to the other side, empathize with them and think about the cultural and historical differences that make up that side. After all, you may have only come to your conclusion as the result of new evidence not available to others. Is your evidence worthy enough to overturn what that society may have believed in for generations? Consider the implications and what might be necessary to make a transition, versus immersion in a new possibly stark reality. Keep in mind, even today there still does exist a Flat Earth Society.

Finding the road to distinguish between the fraud, fake, truth or reality, starts at our front doorstep.

Step 2 Take Stock of your Emotional Reaction

Those in the media, government, religious and the corporate world are adept at getting a certain number of the general public to believe in almost anything. What they prefer to make you not believe in is their own incompetence or hidden agendas. Ever notice how quickly you hear, "I'm not a conspiracy theorist" from academics and politicians?

Just in case you were unaware America was born as the result of a conspiracy. Our founding fathers wanted to kick the king out of the colonies, eliminate many taxes and keep the growth of government into their lives down. There were a lot of secret meetings and plotting, then came the shooting and heaps of other conspiracies. You don't have to look hard for conspiracies today either, only many have found it profitable to ignore that term and use others instead. You may want to research terms like social engineering, behaviour modification and the physiological effects of radio frequencies on behaviour and your health. When it comes to politics, actually reading a bill being proposed is a great idea. Unless of course you are Nancy Pelosi or one of her fans, remember her recommendation regarding the passage of the Health Bill on May 9, 2010, "We have to pass the health care bill so we can find out what's in it away from the fog of the controversy"

When it comes to politics pushing emotional buttons, using simple messages and not providing details has proven to be enough to appease the uninformed masses. Holding large rallies with tens of thousands of approving people and plenty of media attention will insure degrees of credibility. Whether it was Nuremburg in 1936 or a US Presidential rally in 2008, rallies don't guarantee everything, but it will make a lot of people think you are the right team and they will be excited to be part of what is offered.

Unfortunately, the United States of America as well as the rest of the world is sailing into very rough financial waters. Due to the massive consumer spending power of US citizens there are economists and politicians that believe we are just to large to devalue our currency with hyperinflation. Too large to fail is expression you may have heard. Could what happened to Germany before Hitler took over happen to any degree in America? Let this be a test for your critical thinking skills.

As a quick aid: 1) Review the debt to asset ratio's of America's largest financial institutions, 2) What is the Gross Domestic Product of foreign countries when compared to debt? What are the trends here? 3) What has happened to the currency in these countries? Has it dropped? 4) Is Civil Unrest becoming a major problem there or elsewhere? Additional questions will come up, so go forward and discover. Be sure and keep your personal biases corralled.

How does this impact me, my family, and my job? If those pushing the New World Order, which later became termed Globalists, continue to have their way you will see higher prices for everything in the U.S. What you pay for food, fuel, clothes, water and power will continue to rise. The US Dollar is on its way to being devalued again which means what used to cost you one dollar to buy will rise to two, three, four or more. How much of this will you take?

The classic example of the Weimar Republic in pre-1933 Nazi German was that of someone taking a whole wheel barrel of Deutschmarks to use for a loaf of bread. The Germans like America today are monetizing the debt, which means we are printing up money to pay for what we owe, the more we print the less its worth, so we print more, which makes it worth less. History tells us this does not have a happy ending.

If you feel emotionally triggered at any time pause, take a deep breath and then begin to research both sides of the argument. It is a sad commentary that in some countries there is not another side of an argument made available, so you may have to expand your search, in many countries and even some places in the United States this should be done quietly.

By becoming a critical thinker the luxury of having a quick judgement on anything is a rare event. Those exempt would be in the law enforcement, military and the like. After all, when someone shoots at you, defending yourself becomes the biggest priority. Maybe you can sit down for a beer later eh?

How do you know when you are being Mis or Disinformed?

Today the mainstream press is divided into artificially manufactured camps, they are often referred to as conservative/Republican or liberal/socialist/Democrat. Objectivity has long since vanished into petty power struggles with the vast majority of the media lining up on the left hand side of the coin. Members of those media elite often enjoy citing their support for left leaning politicians as Dan Rather did in a May 15, 2001 interview with Bill O'Rielly, upon being asked "Do you think Bill Clinton is an honest man?" Rather retorted, "Yes I think he is an honest man, I think you can be an honest man and lie about any number of things".

Of the major players the lone dissenter from walking in locked left step appears to be Fox-TV, which is probably why their ratings are so phenomenal. Being the single major TV dissenter gathers viewers by default as well as their programming. Those talk show hosts on radio have also found a strong audience to present their case. Without there being such alternatives you can easily expect there to be people who will see this as a major problem, in fact today they are gathering and voting in larger numbers than ever.

The retaliation has come quietly to motivate the Federal Communications Commission to limit and categorize dissent not preferred by the left as hate speech. So much for the first amendment of the US Constitution, which is a great place to study the words left to guide future generations of this country

Having spent years in the media it is clear how words are written, used and emphasized has a lot to do with how they are believed and acted upon. The words and the actual techniques employed with them to manipulate your minds and opinions have been studied, probably for as long as mankind has formed anything resembling a civilization.

One of the techniques used to smoke you out of your mind is known as an Ad Hominum attacks, or Attack on the Man. This is only one of several dozen other Latin terms available, which probably indicates that manipulation of the masses has been well studied at least since the Ancient Romans.

This technique will be employed when one person representing the issue has a strong position. The debunker will bring up a transgression from the past of the individual; say he got drunk and had an accident when he was fifteen, or has a mistress and a child outside of wedlock. While the general public has an insatiable taste for the inside bad behaviour of celebrities and politico's we need to acknowledge that this kind of attack does nothing to forward discussion on the issue. If the attack is not relevant it is ad hominum and therefore being used to substitute what is not relevant for what truly is relevant. Of course this is so irreverent.

To attack the man is destroy his credibility, only if what is offered is directly relevant to the issue can this legitimately be done. Hey, if the Politician has four failed businesses due to his embezzling and fraudulent practices and the discussion is about what was taken out of a budget for which he/she was responsible, then that could be relevant? What it was discovered they had over $100,000 of untraceable cash in a freezer?

Is credible evidence cited? In any debate there is usually one making a claim and another defending the status quo. If there are no opposing viewpoints or good counter questions you can beat you are being snowed.

While the nature of the claim may make it difficult to cite just one piece of evidence, a person can always bring up an offering. Will that evidence actually get discussed or will the debunker put on that typically wry smile and smugly claim "I have been investigating this for umpty-ump years and have never heard of this"

If the argument for or against the issue is poor, than one has to evaluate the presenter or the evidence.

For sake of your own critical thinking argument, ask yourself what is credible evidence? Is credible evidence only that which has been approved by academia, government or fully established scientific credentials? Or can those who are spending months and years or their entire lives studying the subject offer something outside the box? Ask yourself how much of your opinion is shaped by only state approved information, how often have you found it wrong?

Another example, our own Food and Drug Administration is supposed to be keeping our food and drugs safe. In December of 2010 alone there were twenty recalls by the FDA, only five were related to pharmaceutical drugs in any way. Just Google Recalled Drugs and check it out for details.

Another critical thinking question: If Pharmaceutical companies are paying the FDA for review of their own drugs could there be a conflict of interest and influence peddling going on to bypass safety measures for profit? Is there evidence to support this?

In 1992, Congress first authorized FDA to collect fees from pharmaceutical companies with the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA, P.L. 102-571), which amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). Its goals were to speed up FDA's review of new drug applications for approval and to diminish its backlog of applications.

The standard application fee was set at $100,000; there were a few exceptions for drugs addressing an unmet public need. A question for critical thinkers would be how much of the FDA's budget is being paid by pharmaceutical companies. The Scientists and Engineers of America's website: www.sharp.sefora.org was enlightening on the PDUFA, which is Public Law 102-571.

User-fee revenue contributes significantly to FDA's budget. The FY2006 program level for FDA's human drugs program was $517,557,000, of which $219,841,000 (42.5%) was from user fees (the remainder was from direct appropriations).

They can cite the numbers but they can't spell out the effect of influence this has on government agencies. Government agencies bowing to influence and being corrupted in the Defense, Social and other departments are often cited, do we really believe the FDA is above all that? One attorney does not.
http://sharp.sefora.org/issues/the-prescription-drug-user-fee-act-pdufa/2/

Attorney Jonathan Emord author of Global Censorship of Health Information and his latest book, The Rise of Tyranny explained the FDA has become a captive of the drug industry. Stating, "Repeatedly its Commissioner approves drugs over the safety objections of FDA medical reviewers. Dr. David Graham, FDA's Associate Director of the Office of Drug Safety, has severely criticized his own agency for repeatedly approving unsafe drugs. "FDA is inherently biased in favor of the pharmaceutical industry," said Dr. Graham. "It views industry as its client whose interests it must represent and advance. It views its primary mission as approving as many drugs as it can, regardless of whether the drugs are safe or needed." Check out the rest of this article on: http://www.newswithviews.com/Emord/jonathan169.htm

It is easier to baffle Critical Thinkers with a Dumbed down Population.

If you have had your ears and mind open you likely have heard how the American school system has dumbed down its students. This would be key to making us less globally competitive. Use your critical thinking skills to evaluate the evidence for the effects. My conclusion here is to give my the best shot at how it all started.

One of America's first Tycoons, John D. Rockefeller was reported by Jim Marrs, author of once said, "I don't want a nation of thinkers, I want a nation of workers". When the very wealthy elite speak it is best to listen as they have the money to make their dreams or nightmares come true.

Author G. Edward Griffin, author of The Creature from Jekyll Island, a must read for those who really want to understand the origins and purpose of the Fed Reserve had a rare opportunity to interview a man with a lot to say. Shortly before he died Griffin interviewed Mr. Norman Dodd. Today, Dodd is barely a footnote on the political landscape. Dodd did possess the knowledge of the inner workings of finance and government as he was recruited by major bankers to help determine the cause of the 1929 depression and investigate the activities of American Foundations in the 1950's.

Dodd was an eloquent speaker, well educated and a prominent figure in the Reece Congressional Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations. In 1954 Dodd began to investigate the legitimate purposes of American Foundations. One of those assigned to his group to help in this investigation was a young Kathryn Casey who openly believed there was no real purpose to this committee as American Foundations were all about helping and not doing anything harmful. Dodd had met with Dr. Joseph Johnson of the Guggenheim Foundation and his relatively young staff. Dodd says he noticed how they were younger and after discussing the purpose of the committee Johnson volunteered to make the minutes of their meetings available for inspection since their inception around 1905. The window of opportunity was two weeks long and it surprised Dodd that he would actually be allowed to see these minutes, he believed they really didn't know what they had. Dodd assigned this task to Casey and she was given a room at the library and a Dictaphone to record those important parts. Due to the massive volume of minutes Dodd requested Casey focus on key years and months, which she managed to complete.

Upon her return it was clear the Guggenheim Foundation was working in conjunction with both the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations to bring about massive change in the United States. In meeting minutes reviewed after WW I, The Rockefellers were to handle the Domestic while the Carnegie's the International, the Ford Foundation would later be created and be as involved.

At the very first meeting the main question was, "Is there any means more efficient than war to alter the lives of a people?" The answer they came up with in 1905 was no.
In 1909 the question was "How do we involve the US in a war? The answer was to control the State Department and that would be done by controlling the diplomatic machinery, which could be done by appointment of people willing to forward their agenda. In 1914 WWI started and we joined it in 1917.

Other early meeting minutes gave details on that decision which would end up putting America where it is today. There was a decision to alter teaching of American History. This was actually overtly proposed and soundly rejected. The next step for the Guggenheims was to create a their own fellowships, for those who would do their bidding of course. The first twenty were selected, sent to London to get briefed on what was expected. As Dodd states in his interview with Griffin, "This eventually became the nucleus of the American History Association, a study ensued and a four-hundred thousand dollar grant was awarded regarding the future of the US". This kind of fellowship and reward system would put others on the payroll and promote their idea of the future of the United States. The future they had in mind was that it belonged to collectivism coupled with American efficiency.

Dodd knew well what Casey would face as he had an interview with the head of the Ford Foundation himself. The head of the Foundation in 1954, H. Rowan Gaither Jr., upon greeting Dodd advised him he knew of the full purpose of his visit and would be happy to discuss it. Dodd who had not informed Gaither about the full nature of this visit was surprised. Gaither began to explain the purpose of American Foundations, according to Dodd in his interview with Griffin, "That purpose is to merge the United States of America with Communism". Gaither was also adamant about not ever repeating it again and if Dodd quoted it publicly he would deny it.

As far as Kathryn Casey was concerned, Dodd claimed she was so upset by the revelations of those two weeks she could barely function again; as he put it "she went out of her mind".

Gary Allen in his book, The Rockefeller File, reported that Counsel Rene Wormser for the Reece Commission stated about what the evidence uncovered suggested to her, "Leads one to the conclusion that there was, indeed something in the nature of an actual conspiracy among certain leading educators in the United States to bring about Socialism through the use of our school systems".

Since the early twentieth century the teachings of the wonders of Socialism and communism have been a steady under current with people who call themselves progressives today. Look about you today at those that revel with Che Quevara t-shirts, adoring Fidel Castro, Mao-Tse-Tung and other Communist Icons, this is no accident.

Jonah Goldberg author of Liberal Fascism and other books discovered that Socialists, in particular Fabian Socialists stopped using the term Socialist in the twenties. They decided to change their name to Progressive's, the goals were the same, state run everything and redistribution of wealth and the eventual elimination of the US Constitution. Oddly enough the Americans of yesteryear were educated and clever enough to see their way through that smokescreen, so they didn't buy it then. In the 21st century it is

Today, with the lack of historical teaching on the subject even Hillary Clinton has openly announced she is a Progressive, does it mean the same as years ago? Listen observe, research and enjoy putting your critical thinking skills to a new mind-saving task. This is a badly needed task to save your mind, your family and the very country we are in. Do not go out of your mind doing this, but go into your mind and get it done.