This and all other postings are WORKS IN PROGRESS. Each selection is added to, corrections made, and questions asked are answered as needed. I add new findings as they become available, often before proofing.
Thank you,
Ernest Earl Dennis.
Rational Thought -- Part Eight
Defining the rational concepts of:
Problem versus Symptom
Reposted March 15, 2006
An excellent case for learning rational literacy can be given in the utter confusion created by the lack of a single rational vocabulary term's definition; its “meaning" in rational literacy. This is evidenced by “symptom,” and the resulting bewilderment when it is confused with the word “problem.”
Consider, and then see, how lacking the concept of “symptom” leaves the person ineffective at resolving “problems:”
What is labeled by most “a problem,” what we see or feel as distressing, is just a “symptom” of a “problem.” A symptom is only the shadow of the actual problem - the evidence by which “the problem” touches the individual and makes itself known. Symptoms are usually all we get to warn us that something is wrong; the only indication there is “a problem.”
Once in words, this distinction seems simple, obvious, and basic, yet, at a time when rational illiteracy is the rule, rather than the exception; symptom versus problem is the source of much weeping and gnashing of teeth, social upheaval and, yes, despair!
It helps to know that the rational context of “symptom” comes from “the law of sympathetic resonance,” the universal law, which, among other things, governs music:
For a brief example in the physical realm, were you to walk into a room full of guitars. If you started picking a single string, it would begin to “resonate,” and soon all the other LIKE strings in the room would begin to resonate “in sympathy.”
If this were new to you, the first time it happened, no doubt, it could well awe and amaze you. The same law of sympathetic resonance produces similar outcomes wherever it is applied in many other areas. The above example is, however, ample illustration of the cause and effect affect for us to move on.
Incidentally, you may want to make a note of political reporters commenting on whether or not a theme “'resonated' among voters.” This inquiry is given to question whether “a theme” had the proper temper to cause a sympathetic resonance in voters, enough to make them include that “single note” as part of their own repertoire of opinions.
There was a time when the difference between a “problem” and a “symptom” was so little understood, universally, that our most-educated ancestors only focused on relieving symptoms of disease. The prescription for a high fever was an immersion in cold water to affect a “cure.” This, not realizing that fever was only a symptom of the real problem: infection. Today, we know to cure the infection problem, and so by default dismiss the symptom, the fever.
No better example of the despair and confusion that lack of rational literacy creates today, (ironically, among the best intentioned of citizens), is presently making headlines. It is what the common man “thinks of" as the growing “drug problem.”
Of course, in rational context, and in reality, “the drug problem” is not the problem, only a symptom of a problem.
Einstein once said that a problem could not be solved with the “mind” that created it, and “minds” lacking the now-known rational understanding of “symptom” have created a situation without resolution, as their “rationale” lacks rational context.
To gauge the accuracy of this, consider that even the lessons of prohibition failed to enliven rational thought, or even start a discussion. A majority of society has its "mind" made up, and officials are expected to continue “the war on the evils of drugs.” Each offensive launched at “the shadow” leads to another, yet “opinions” in the majority still define the policy.
“Opinions” are based upon personal experience, and without rational context, “opinions” are almost always inaccurate, even absurd. Experience tells us the earth is flat; the land is stationary while the sun moves over us.
Opinions are also based on what we can see and therefore assume is real, or, all there is. Without rational context, personal opinion would deny the flow of electrons down a copper wire and explain the symptom of the light bulb's glow as “the only real deal.”
Ignorance is ignoring available understandings. One aspect of arrogance is ignoring any reality that challenges one's opinion, regardless the cost.
A “fool” is someone trying to fool another, such as posturing that they know all the right answers, when it is abundantly evident they don't even know the QUESTION.
I have a positive attitude regarding the future. I am not cynical, or pessimistic. I find it grievous to be in the position of defining any probability that is less than uplifting, inspiring, or optimistic. Nor do I wish to put myself in a situation that would tend to label me, my work, or, especially, the field I represent, in the "doom and gloom" camp. One who throws manure gets the smell on them.
Yet, I have forgone personal advantages, in favor of decades of study, to serve you in areas where others either do not care, or have too much to lose by being honest, or to be your advocate without a billing address. Yet we have a serious symptom in the “drug problem” that rational literacy will eventually moderate. Unfortunately, "eventually" almost certainly will not be in my lifetime, or, quite likely yours.
The matter at hand is of such consequence; I do not have the option of seeking to win a popularity contest. No doubt my defining this “drug dilemma” is going to offend some, maybe you; however, I am offended by the outright stupidity* (*means intellectual stupor) from both the “right,” and the “left” in their personal subjectivity. We expect emotional opinions from the left; but what is particularly egregious, embarrassing, and unsolvable, is the illogical attitude from the right, from which we expect objective guidance. Instead, we see the same level of rational vacancy demonstrated during “the noble experiment” labeled prohibition.
Of course, one must take into consideration that, at this point in our historical evolvement, our culture is rationally illiterate, and the significance of symptom versus “problem” is not recognized. Doing the same thing over and over, only with greater intensity, and expecting a different result, is pathetic. How much “intelligence” does it take to see that the more they do, which obviously is not working, the more they will get of what they are getting.
Even lacking a background in psychology, would not centuries of human history demonstrate that self-medicating is a human proclivity that cannot be eradicated, but must be aggressively managed?
If for some personal reason a river were an inconvenience, what would be an intelligent action to take? Would one attempt to eliminate the river? Or, would it be wiser to manage the flow, and devise safeguards for flood surges?
If all previous efforts to eliminate this troublesome element of nature had been proven to only exacerbate the “problem,” yet, failure was not an option, would it be “smart” to unite an all-out assault by declaring a “war” to expand doing what has already been proven to fail?
The price of personal progress is often honesty. Unfortunately, recognizing an error and making an adjustment is rare. More common is taking a defensive posture to defend the indefensible, and some find it offensive when their folly is pointed out.
Then there is the subjective class, the Emoters that are offended at anything that challenges them, as they react emotionally, lacking the maturity to even help themselves, much less aid with social dilemmas.
Due to today's almost universal level of rational illiteracy at all social and educational levels, the illiterate assume the “symptom” to be the “problem.” While it is the ignorance of our time period that underwrites this problem, pride defends it: This will not change on its own; one can only hope a rational perspective will evolve sooner, rather than later.
Most of the people who assume they "know" what "the problem is,” and "know the solution," are good, well-meaning people, and include our many outstanding, highly educated professional citizens. Yet, they, too, are among the rationally ignorant, which is the norm, at this time: No different than when physicians were first told of the necessity of washing their hands.
The present lack of a nomological concept of rational outcome is not a respecter of social status, either. Consider the habits of our ancestors before the relationship between hygiene and infection became widely known. Physicians and laborers, alike, did what they assumed was best with what was known during their time. Of course it took the passing of a generation for acceptance to replace the opinion that it was “absurd to believe something unseen could be a danger." Curiously, physicians were among the most vocal in voicing ridicule.
I would rather not include something as polarizing as the “drug” pandemic in a discussion of rational literacy, even though it is one of the best examples of what the lack of rational literacy can create in a “rational society.” Step back in time and consider the reaction, were I to have written that physicians were actually harming their patients by prescribing mercury to treat disease. Imagine the outrage to have questioned their professional prognosis to the outcome.
Yet, even the layman patients realized the prescribed remedy was disastrous. The Lewis and Clark expedition used mercury to treat syphilis as prescribed. President Abraham Lincoln, too, took mercury and realized it was “destroying his mind.” Still, even then, the rule was to not question the current paradigm of belief.
So, too, do I realize that society extracts a high price on juxtaposing facts alongside whatever folly is popular at the time. First, instigating the solution is presently a lost cause. Second, it will not endear me to the very people I wish to address. Third, by addressing this social issue, I offend both ends of the political spectrum: the pragmatic on the right, the emotional on the left. Yet, when I chose to make rational literacy available to the general public my life's work, over a career, I realized it could not be effective if ran as a popularity contest. Also, I promised myself I would give you my best, and I would do for you what others would not. “If not me, then who will?”
Obviously, people with the background to do such work are busy building their careers, and retirement funds. I found that choice somehow less satisfying than dedicating myself to building a better tomorrow for faces I will never see, people I will never meet. Just know, that I already know the rewards, as investing in the future is a sure thing. The sun will most surely set on today's “now,” and our investments in it. We can only take with us what we endow to the future.
As to offending one and all, I owe it to you to add that there is also not a hint of a workable solution to the current pandemic within the emotionally driven liberal perspective of withholding judgment, or its drive to modify standards for the convenience of the individual, subject to the individual's proclivities.
This merely continues the movement's irrational drive to "liberalize," meaning to drop social standards ever closer to the lowest common denominator, and, as "the head count" is greater at the bottom circling around the drain, than that of the achievers, so is the power, by virtue of numbers. They can choose social direction with their vote. So, no solutions should be expected from the “liberal” voting block either.
Ignorance, particularly when combined with polarized, emotionally driven choices, cannot be defeated directly. Rather, the bulk of that generation must pass for its intellectual vacancy, filled with emotion by default, to be replaced with the only known remedy: New knowledge. Much like a weed, one does not entirely eradicate ignorance, but keep it from spreading to one's own garden. You must pull the weeds and purposely grow “the good” in your plot. Weeds grow where they will; you cannot “change” what is outside your gates to conform to your vision. Yes, the weeds will have seeds and always annoy. Deal with the weeds, as all you can actually manage is your own garden. Then, carefully select your best seeds for future planting. They, and their fruits, are all you can give to the future that can live and grow better tomorrows.
The rational mind has capabilities beyond anything you, or I, could possibly entertain as possible, considering the present lack of information regarding our rational potential. At the same time we understand that, regardless of how powerful our “mental hardware,” what we “get out” is dependent on our “rational software,” as just exampled by confusion over the context of the term symptom.
We are all held hostage by ignorance when it holds a majority, as, once more, it cannot be defeated directly. Change is irrational; rather, people do evolve if given the right “tools.” Once more, almost always, an entire generation must pass for their deeply rooted paradigms to be overtaken, and crowded out by new growth that is nurtured by the light of knowledge and understanding.
Today, at this very moment, be sure you keep growing, not getting too ripe, as to avoid molding too early during your short season in the sun. Be part of the solution, do what you can to resolve "problems,” as the resolution will be our legacy.
How we “live” can be either way. Live, going forward to enrich the future: It is the way it should be. Do it backwards, and “live” spells “evil.” In folklore, one “lived” to seed the future: One who lived just for the moment, had it backwards as well, and “lived” going backwards, and spelled that way, meant they would have one “devil” of a time finding peace.
As parents and adults, we need to commit to self-learning and when necessary, to rewriting “software” we had installed as children by default, without our permission.
“With all thy getting, get understanding.” I have, and I continue with, my “getting.” Now I need all the help I can get to give to a greater audience. If we don't, who will? If I didn't, who else would, or could: The personal careers and agendas, or serving you without reservation? Consider the chances of others writing the above definitions.
Education adds enormous value to one's time; it also seems to subtract incentive from serving the greatest need, to focus on the greatest income - and let someone else do the heavy lifting. My incentive, however, is in the other direction, which is outcome, and need help with the income. Making others aware of this information source by word of mouth is something I would ask you to please consider. In advance, I give you my thanks, and bless you with love, times two.
RationalPower.com will continue to define more rational process, answer your questions.
Please lend me your hand by telling friends about RationalPower.com
I appreciate you, your letters, your grants of support. Thank you!
Ernest Earl Dennis, Editor
Post Office Box 1806
Longview, WA 98632-8117
For the sake of transparency regarding this site, and its editor,
you may go to the Editor's Page. Thank you.
© Copyright 2006, by Ernest Earl Dennis
|