7. Understanding Intelligent Choice
Intelligent choice is determining the collection of actions that are believed will yield the desired results. Choice is the means that mankind adapts to environmental conditions to secure goals, including survival. If no results are desired or the current state of affairs is considered acceptable, there is no need for choice. By definition, a result is a measurable state of affairs in the real world of action and consequence. Thus, intelligence makes no choice and no effort is expended unless a result is desired. The truth is, in the affairs of mankind, as in the natural world is that action leads to consequence. For man, all choices (action or non-action) are in pursuit of a result.
Even if the desired result is to have someone believe something, their beliefs and the choices they make because of them ultimately resolves to actions which result in consequences in the real world. The ultimate provider of results is the natural world governed by the physical laws of nature.
Indirect results from nature may be secured by transferring results from people who are in possession of either the ability to achieve or physical possession of the goods you want. Mankind is also governed by natural relationships between action and consequence.
Providers of goods and services are proxy providers of results who use their resources and expertise to provide results for a cost.
For those who believe political promises and government coercion can ever achieve anything positive at acceptable cost, participating in the political process by voting or running for office is believed to be a way to get the desired results by proxy.
For those who acknowledge God, it is believed another method exists which is to pray for the desired results and have God be the proxy who does the work.
7.1 Choices When Dealing with Nature
The physical world is a place of action leading to consequence in defined environments. Knowledge of the relationship between action and consequence under known environmental conditions allows prediction of consequence (results) in response to action (choice).
If the desired result is a hole, nature will trade a hole in exchange for the energy expended in moving the dirt. Note that this energy must be intelligently directed towards moving dirt. A more precise description is applying energy to the dirt causes it to move leaving a hole. The point is that nature cannot be forced or intimidated to provide a hole by the random application or threat of force. Force must be applied in such a manner that the dirt moves out of the hole in accord with the laws of nature. This is true even if nuclear weapons are used to make holes. Note that the energy required to move a fixed amount of dirt a fixed distance is a constant. Even though it may appear easier to use a steam shovel, the same amount of energy, but less manpower is required.
If the desired result is a crop, the laws of nature determine when to plant, ongoing care requirements for the crop and when to harvest. Ignoring the laws of nature results in the consequence of no or poor crop.
If the desired result is a machine to perform some function, it must comply with the laws of nature or it will not function.
In general, if you want something from nature, you must perform actions consistent with the significant laws of nature in the target environment to get the desired results.
Nature also responds to creating an artificial environment where nature´s laws respond to the presence of the proper inputs with desired outputs. For example, creating the environment of a blast furnace with proper temperature, pressure and materials will result in the creation (consequence) of steel.
If nature is considered as a trading partner, nature is an honest partner in the sense that results are consistently provided according to an unchanging set of rules. Nature thus responds only to honest trade on its terms (natural law). In the sense that natures laws apply to all equally, nature is also fair. If you want something from nature, the only choice is to understand the applicable laws within the environment and comply by performing the required actions to get the desired consequences.
Some believe that prayer, pleading or other indirect methods not in accord with nature´s laws are able to influence nature. Many have claimed to have achieved this influence over nature. In all of history, no proof of this has been provided.
7.2 Choices When Dealing with Mankind
The previous section dealt with the choices that nature provides to get results. The only choice is to understand the laws of nature and perform the actions which results in the desired consequence. This may be as simple as using a stick to knock fruit out of a tree to as complex as creating the temperature, pressure and chemical environment of the sun to build a fusion reactor for energy from seawater.
Man may also get results from other men who are either in possession of the desired results (food, money ...) or have the ability to get the desired results from nature. The question is, what, if any, are the general rules (knowledge) determining the relationship between action and consequence for mankind? Note that anything desired by man must ultimately resolve to material things or services from other men who use the laws of nature. For example, if you are ill and want extended life, you must use the services of a doctor who knows natural law with respect to the human body.
In the area of man relating to man with respect to getting desired results (consequences), the consequences are really goals which require influencing others to provide them. The question becomes, what are the choices available to influence you fellow men?
All of us are able to influence others around us, given that we understand the motivations of the individuals we are trying to influence. If you are married, you know how to please and displease your spouse, who also knows your hot buttons. It is the same with your children and friends. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that all sane people (rational choices consistent with their accepted reality) have some predictable relationship between what they experience and their reactions. Therefore, if you make the proper choices, they will react in the desired manner. As manipulative as it sounds, it is a fact of life that we can and do influence others, as they influence us. Thus, when unique personalities (environmental conditions) are considered, we can agree that knowledge (relationship between action and consequence in an environment) exists in the area of influencing particular others. This is not general knowledge, since it depends on the unique characteristics of the individuals involved.
In seeking general knowledge regarding the choices available to influence all people to meet your goals, we must also define the environmental conditions under which this knowledge applies, including attributes of people that are common to all.
It is assumed the following is true for all people:
- All want to survive
- If able, all will defend themselves if their survival is threatened
- All require material things (home, food, land, services, security ...) to survive
- The environment has limited resources and all must therefore compete to survive
In achieving the goal of getting something from another person, there are only three possibilities, force, fraud and honest mutually agreed (fully informed) trade. You can use force and take what you want, you can use fraud and trick someone to give you what you want or you can trade something the other values for what you want. There are no other possible goal seeking methods.
Forceful goal seeking is the usage of force or threat of force (fraud if it is a bluff) to threaten the victim´s survival if they do not hand over what you want. Examples of force are military, law, guns, brute strength, strength of numbers, etc. If the goal is a material thing that already exists, force is very effective in concluding the transaction. If the goal requires the provision of labor or intellectual accomplishment, force is ineffective, since slaves control their own work output and can arrange matters such that it costs more to care for them than it is worth.
Fraudulent goal seeking may at first appear to be an honest trade. Those who willingly agree to trade based on incomplete or false information eventually realize they have been defrauded when the full facts come out. For instance, socialism is a mammoth fraud perpetrated against its supporters who are promised a workers utopia, only to discover that they are impoverished by the destruction of productivity due to removing motivation to contribute. Further, all political and economic power is transferred to elites and away from those who earned it. As another example, the entire war on terrorism and Iraq are fraudulent, since public and Congressional support were achieved based on lies, incomplete information and false goals presented by security interests who have profited enormously.
Honest trade goal seeking is between parties who are fully aware of all costs and benefits of the trade and agree to trade willingly.
The above proof that there are only three methods of goal seeking (force, fraud, trade) for all goals and all men under all conditions has been deemed insufficient by some who were not convinced, yet were unable to provide an example of any method of transferring something from one person to another which is not one of the three or some combination of the three methods.
To address the skeptics (those in strategic denail), I will prove it another way. If you are deprived of anything, including your time, it must be either with your consent or not. A trade without your consent can only be achieved by the involvement of force. A trade with your consent may appear to be honest at first, but undisclosed consequences later make it fraudulent. If the terms of the trade remain what you consented to, the trade is honest. Theft without your knowledge is fraud by avoiding consent.
The profound significance of the fact that there are only three methods of goal seeking (force, fraud, honest trade) available when man seeks goals from man cannot be underestimated.
If the above is coupled with mankind´s compelling need to survive and the fact we live in an environment of limited resources, it is apparent that, if able, when men are deprived of their property unwillingly by force or fraud, it negatively affects their survival and the natural response is defensive violence. Thus, honest, mutually agreed trade is the only way to achieve goals without creating conflict. This basic fact once formed the basis of all law, whose purpose was to suppress forceful and fraudulent methods of goal seeking, to protect civilization which can only exist by honest trade (cooperation).
For the above reasons, given that governments do not honestly trade with their citizens, the natural response is to self-defensive violence on the part of the citizenry. It is for this reason that governments maintain a large amount of retaliatory force, so citizens conclude it is better to be preyed upon than to be utterly destroyed and deprived of all property. It is because of this massive retaliatory force that Americans (including the judiciary) are not dealing with their criminal rulers who have completely destroyed all of the positive that the US has achieved throughout history, to the point that Americans are hated, feared and reviled as much a the Nazis, for the same reasons.
7.3 Feedback Model of Intelligent Choice
Human behavior, which is really intelligent choice in the area of meeting goals may be considered as a feedback control system, as shown above. The blocks are the various functions contributing to choice interconnected by processed information.
The input for intelligent choice is the difference between the desired goal and one´s perception of reality as indicated by the choice of action function which is intelligence. If it is perceived that the goal is met, there is no need for choice. If there is a difference between the desired goal and perception of reality (true result), some choice (action) will be made. This action will cause a response from the environment (true result). This result will be perceptually processed and subtracted from the goal. If they are identical, you have made a correct choice and are done.
If, however, the choice was inappropriate, the perceived result will not equal the desired result. This means that either the environment has not responded as expected or there is a perceptual error. In either case, your understanding of the environment is incorrect and must be reconsidered. In other words, new knowledge must be sought in the area of action versus consequence of choice. This applies to individuals and groups.
Recall that there are only three ways of achieving goals, force, fraud and honest trade. A ruler is one who seeks goals without honest trade. From the perspective of rulers, intent on controlling your choice there are only two goal-seeking choices, force and fraud or trickery.
For forceful goal-seeking, rulers will make sure that you are aware that some choices will result in forceful consequences. For example, the choice to refuse to pay taxes will result in seizure of your property and/or loss of freedom. The number of people who actually exhibit the courage to make survival threatening choices such as this is small enough that the force rulers are willing to keep around is sufficient to deal with these troublesome dissenters. Should all taxpayers act in common interest and refuse to be intimidated, there is no amount of force that can make them comply. This is why it is so important for rulers to maintain the perception that there is no such thing as common interest to usurp cooperation.
For fraudulent methods of goal seeking, rulers have total control of your environment. The goals you choose to seek in life are a product of wants influenced by education, socialization and media such as movies. Your choice of action is dependent on your understanding of reality (perception) which is influenced by education and media.
Should you choose to trust and accept the "official" version of reality and not question your goals, education and information sources, you will make choices consistent with what those who control your reality want you to do. You will be a slave, living a pointless life, not of your own choosing.
This decision feedback model also applies to groups such as government. In this case the goal is chosen based on the perception that it is desired to project to the people combined with the internal goals of the group. The environment will respond to this choice. Media will alter the true result with their own biases, perceptions and goals. This information will filter through the many layers of government bureaucracy, being altered at each step per the perceptions and goals of each layer until a report is made to the ultimate decision-maker who then adds their biases, perceptions and goals prior to making a decision. Based on this organization with many layers between reality and perception, and the ability to add goals contrary to the will of the people affected, top-down government choices are by nature flawed and no amount of checks or balances can ever fix this. This was a major factor in the collapse of the former Soviet Union and every past civilization. The only way to fix this is by making choices as close to the facts as possible using goals chosen by those affected. The ideal case is to have people directly make choices based on the facts, their own unique environment and goals. The only social organization that can possibly work for man is bottom-up decisions and freedom of people to make their own choices. This used to be the organization of western civilization. It has been historically proven to work.
The nature of intelligent choice via perception is scientifically analyzed in "Behavior: The Control of Perception" by William Trevel Powers, R[x].
7.4 Requirements For Intelligence to Function
7.4.1 Stable, Precise Definitions (Units of Information)
- "The precise assignment of meaning to a symbol, allowing the symbol to be used in place of the real thing."
This saves the inconvenience of having to point to an elephant every time you want to discuss one.
Information is the subject matter of intelligence. The absence of information or lack of predictability of action leading to consequence results in intelligence having no subject matter making intelligence impotent. An environment with no predictability or rules cannot be analyzed. It will drive you mad to try. This fact has been used by interrogators and torturers throughout all of recorded history.
To be intelligent, it is possible to randomly assign mental images (definitions) to units of information and coherently think and understand the world in these terms, so long as the definitions remain stable to maintain precision and avoid confusion. This is likely the mental state of early man and infants, before the invention or learning of spoken language.
The invention of spoken language (agreed assignment of sounds to fact and concepts) is clearly the greatest leaps in mankind´s intelligent ability. It allows the comparison of diverse subjective opinions between individuals to discover true knowledge of reality.
The invention of writing (agreed assignment of visual symbols to fact and concepts) is a further abstraction of language. It allows the dissemination of knowledge and subjective opinion greater range in space and time. This has the advantage of allowing even more intellects to participate in the discovery of objective knowledge. It also has the advantage of being able to record knowledge. This allows subsequent man to learn from his ancestors. This is the memory of mankind, called history, the greatest and most misrepresented and underused to the point of suppression survival asset of mankind and civilization. Change recorded historical truth and you destroy the knowledge gained and replace it with fake knowledge which supports the fake reality desired by those who control this knowledge. This was one of George Orwell´s most terrifying points in 1984, the severance of man from his past and knowledge and therefore reality and ability to intelligently choose. If libraries are replaced by internet libraries, those who control the internet will have the means and ability to re-write history and knowledge, as warned by George Orwell.
When definitions of words changes over the ages, the knowledge and concepts embodied in these words are lost to all except linguistic historians, who thus gain a monopoly and ability to misrepresent these truths. When we allow the precise meaning of crucial words such as freedom and fairness to become imprecise, we lose the reality of these concepts and our ability to discuss them in any but subjective terms, an exercise leading to conflict, which is what it took to define (achieve social consensus) these words in the first place and will again.
In general, whoever controls the definitions of words, controls the debate and is able to introduce much miscommunication and confusion in the affairs of mankind. Words are always created and defined by the discoverer of a new concept or fact who wishes to communicate this to his fellow man. Misuse or redefinition of any word destroys its original meaning, subverts all knowlege based on the concept, confuses communication and creates conflict.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master--that´s all."
From Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll.
We have a word with major negative social connotations for people who insist on exact meaning and clarity. They are called "pedantic". I wonder who really cares whether we are "pedantic" or not and what´s in it for them? More interesting is the question of how and why being "pedantic" was turned into a gauche social attribute and how this is maintained. Perhaps it is a simple matter of people with intelligence being viewed by the average person as threatening, capable of achieving advantage by trickery. Perhaps they are right about this. A better defense strategy is to not discourage people from being "pedantic" and to be on guard at the first sign. An intelligent person intent on trickery would use stealth and try to fit in to achieve trust and lowering of your guard prior to bushwhacking you.
"Dogmatic" is another word which means "assertion without proof" and now appears to have drifted to mean "anyone firmly expressing a statement, true or not".
In general, the less precise or the more possible interpretations of words, the less clarity and objective knowledge that can be conveyed. Truth requires precision. This is the reason it is no longer intellectually useful to consider the words of politicians or the legal "profession". There is no meaning. Judge them by their actions or lack thereof. All else is meaningless noise and misdirection.
As an example of the dangerous effect of fuzziness on language, let´s redefine two as being between one and three and five as being between four and six. Now, let´s see what happens when we multiply two by five:
Precise: 2 x 5 = 10
Fuzzy: (1 to 3) x (4to 6)
Case 1: minimum interpretation: 1 x 4 (still 2 x 5) = 4
Case 2: maximum interpretation: 3 x 6 (still 2 x 5) = 18
Thus, fuzzy 2 x 5 is a fuzzy number between 4 and 18 where 4 and 18 are also defined in a fuzzy manner.
The point is, not only are individual concepts fuzzy, but when fuzzy concepts are combined and claimed to be knowledge, the fuzziness (uncertainty of results) multiplies.
I shall further continue as a confessed pedantic and falsely accused dogmatist. Pedantic by insistence on clarity, dogmatic by insistence that there is such a thing as truth.
7.4.2 Stability, Security and Time
These are major requirements for intelligence to function. In order to consider facts and discover knowledge, a stable environment with few distractions is required to observe, consider, hypothesize, confirm and refine knowledge. Uninterrupted time is required to follow a chain of reasoning to conclusion. Interruptions, distractions or lack of security all force attention away from the task at hand. Intelligence requires a predictable environment in which inevitable or at least statistically significant consequence follows from action. In the absence of such an environment, intelligence has no subject matter and is made impotent.
Note that providing a stable, secure environment with few distractions is exactly why you should not let your children watch TV, listen to music, talk on the phone, etc while doing their homework. It also explains why firm parental consistency is the only viable parenting approach, despite many contrary "professional" opinions.
As a thought exercise for the reader, exactly why is it considered bad to be in a boring environment and where did this opinion come from? How is it re-enforced?
I am not yet fully convinced, but am beginning to believe that one of the many reasons for war is, to destabilize civilization, destroy social gains and prevent mankind from intelligently addressing problems (ie; the predations of PTB´s). Another possible reason for war is to keep mankind at a subsistence level so we are willing to accept the suffering (by predators on mankind) of others, as a perceived "necessary" moral compromise for our own survival.
7.4.3 Ability to Choose
Having used intelligence to establish the facts of any situation (environment, balance of significant forces), it is necessary to express intelligent conclusions by making a choice and performing an action which will result in consequence in the real world of action and consequence. Failure to follow through on rational conclusions because of fear or other compulsions completely negates intelligence, making you irrelevant so far as the real world is concerned.