Robert interviews author, John C.A. Manley about his latest book All the Humans Are Sleeping. Here’s what Robert and Bob had to say about it:
“Once again, John C.A. Manley has created a masterpiece. The narrative transcends his story’s plot, infusing insights and observations about some of the most fundamental issues that have faced mankind throughout history.” —Bob Metz
“In All the Humans Are Sleeping,John C.A. Manley skillfully crafts a compelling post-apocalyptic psychological drama where a man faces his ultimate challenge: follow the rest of humanity into a life of shallow fantasies and comfortable lies, or face death in a harsh and unforgiving world devoid of love and hope. And then there’s the robot… You won’t predict the ending, and you won’t be able to put it down.” —Robert Vaughan
Comments Off on 890 – Left or Right? It’s about time we got it Right!
Dec112024
Many on the Right have recently found themselves questioning whether or not those on the Left are literally suffering from some kind of mental illness. In making this observation, Montreal litigator turned YouTuber David Freiheit recently said “I’m trying not to think along the terms of Left versus Right,” yet nevertheless was compelled to do exactly that. “Something is broken about a Leftie brain,” he concluded.
And he was essentially correct, though not for the reason he suspects. What is ‘broken’ in a ‘Leftie’s brain’ is the Left’s epistemology, which consists of a litany of false definitions, contradictions in logic, and an explicit rejection of reality. This mindset originates from the ‘Primacy of Consciousness,’ a way of thinking which holds that reality has no independent existence and is a product of consciousness.
No different than a computer programmed with corrupt software, those on the Left have been programmed by a ‘garbage-in-garbage-out’ political language and ideology that does not correspond to reality. Consequently, more and more rational people are beginning to realize that the Left and Right are much more widely polarized along fundamental principles than previously believed.
Of course, the fundamental flaw in the long believed-in ‘political spectrum’ is that, with Communism on the Left and Fascism falsely represented as the Right, freedom and capitalism were nowhere to be found. But both in theory and practice, fascism belongs on the Left along with its other collectivist ideologies. Freedom belongs on the Right. This is a polarity, not a spectrum. Continue reading »
Comments Off on 887 – You be the judge—from entity to identity | Paul McKeever
Nov202024
Whether acknowledged or not, every individual has a philosophy, leaving open only the question of how well that philosophy is understood.
At a time when so many people are unable to determine even their own identity (whether based on gender, sexual, political, racial, social, religious grounds, etc.) let alone the nature of the world around them, the dystopian consequences of popular philosophy’s shortcomings have become embarrassingly evident. However, the causes are not so evident because they relate to a failure to properly identify the very nature of things that exist – entities.
The solution to this dilemma, explains our guest Paul McKeever, is to consider the ‘identity’ of any ‘entity’ from a ‘first person’ perspective, not from a ‘third-person’ perspective based on some relationship with the entity in question. If all this seems rather abstract, it is, but the ‘first person’ perspective resolves a fundamental error made by philosophers throughout the ages.
In his monumental work, “Judge: Philosophy and Freedom in the First Person,” Paul meticulously examines thirteen classic philosophical problems, offering solutions with such lucidity that there remains no justification for their continued discussion as credible issues. Written over a period of ten years, it is the product of a philosophical examination never before undertaken.
‘Judge’ presents both a challenge and a clarity to many long-held philosophical concepts including, among others, free will, induction, causation, perspective, relation, entity, identity, change, autonomy, and freedom itself.
In the field of philosophy there are four essential categories affecting how and what choices people make. Metaphysics and epistemology describe ‘what is.’ Morality and politics describe ‘what ought’ to be. But if one’s moral and political actions are based on a false conception of ‘what is,’ then a dystopian unreality becomes a natural consequence of the error. Hence, the importance of being able to correctly identify the reality within which one acts.
In an age of ‘identity politics,’ it’s surprising how little the concept of ‘identity’ is actually understood. For that shortcoming, we can blame the philosophers throughout the ages who never got it Just Right.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
For many, philosophy has devolved into an exercise where errors in reasoning, logic, and definitions are layered upon one another, resulting in the field becoming a subject of mockery among the general populace. Imagine if foundational sciences like physics, chemistry, or mathematics had clung to their initial mistakes; we might never have seen the advent of computers or advancements in medicine, and basic arithmetic could still be in dispute.
To rejuvenate the importance of philosophy, we need to pinpoint and resolve its historical puzzles and paradoxes, effectively consigning them to obsolescence.
In his work, “Judge: Philosophy and Freedom in the First Person,” Paul McKeever meticulously examines twelve classic philosophical problems, offering solutions with such lucidity that there remains no justification for their continued discussion as credible issues.
“Judge” distinguishes itself as a work of deep insight, crucial not just for academic scholars but for anyone intrigued by the exploration of human nature, our connection to reality, and our interactions with others. In a very novel way, it provides one with an understanding of reality, perception, identity, logical reasoning, ethical principles, and the fundamental aspects of individual freedom.
However, there’s no need to take our word for this assessment. In keeping with the theme of McKeever’s work, you be the judge.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
Comments Off on 856 – ATHEISNT—Fallacies And Realities About Atheists
Apr172024
Atheist Richard Dawkins recently sparked a controversy that challenges fundamental assumptions about both atheism and faith-based belief. Referring to himself as a “cultural Christian” he has been criticized by both atheists and religious believers alike.
Unfortunately, too many self-described atheists are being unfairly criticized and maligned by those who, on the one side, equate atheism with an absence of morality, while on the other equate the sharing of some religious beliefs with unprincipled atheism.
One dictionary we consulted incorrectly defines ‘atheism’ as “the belief that there is no god.” The problem with this definition is that atheism is not a ‘belief’ system at all. Nor is atheism a philosophy or code of morality. It is merely the non-acceptance or a rejection of the concept of a literal supernatural ‘deity’ – nothing else. Atheism does not require ‘belief’ as its base of justification. Atheism is primarily a response to theism, which does rely on ‘faith’ and ‘belief.’
The fact that many atheists abide by a moral code that mirrors that associated with Christianity is less about atheists borrowing from Christian values than it is about Christians and atheists alike borrowing values from other shared philosophical sources. This includes many writers and philosophers throughout history setting out the principles of Western culture over time – from the early Greeks through the Age of Enlightenment and to the present day.
Those who blame atheism as being the source of our current tyrannical zeitgeist – or who blame the Soviet Union’s past tyrannical history on its ‘officially atheist status’ are arguing a contradiction. One cannot judge any individual or national actions on what is ‘not’ believed and practiced but on what ‘is’ believed and practiced. In both cases, the cause of the tyranny was (and is) the ideology of collectivism.
Today’s WOKE ideology is merely the latest label given to yesterday’s Marxist ideology – and religious affiliation or lack thereof has little to do with the support of such ideologies. The same principle holds true for freedom.
Whether atheist or religious, if one accepts and respects the principles of individualism, individual rights and freedom, then it is possible for people of every belief and non-belief to share the ideals and blessings of a society that’s Just Right, with the understanding that freedom of religion also includes the right to be free from religion.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
Comments Off on 855 – Do you mind?—thinking about thinking
Apr102024
There has recently been a growing concern and much discussion about why so many people are still not awake, but just remain WOKE in the face of a pending civilizational collapse. “The WOKE mind virus is the greatest existential threat faced by humanity,” concludes Gad Saad, and Elon Musk apparently shares his alarm.
Among other causes cited for this sad state of affairs are the inability to have an inner monologue, the effect of the Covid spike protein, fear mongering, bacteria, chronic infection, the fake news media, intelligence guided by irrational bias, and of course the WOKE ideology, to name but a few.
Missing from most of the discussions is the ‘means’ by which people actually think: through the use of concepts and language. Because the human mind is essentially ‘programmable,’ and because words and concepts are the ‘software’ on which each mind functions, humans in the exercise of free will have the capacity and choice to think and behave either rationally or irrationally.
An irrational concept is one that does not conform to reality or reason. And significantly, irrational concepts can be held by highly intelligent people. How is this possible? Continue reading »
Comments Off on 852 – Primacy—consciousness or existence?
Mar202024
“In politics, perception is reality, the truth doesn’t matter.”
Given the broad acceptance of this view of politics, it should not be surprising that so many good people see politics as an evil. They thus avoid getting involved in a process that affects everyone’s life whether they are interested in politics or not.
But this viewpoint is itself a form of political propaganda because in reality the truth does indeed matter in politics, so much so that political interests which are not aligned with truth go to such great lengths to hide and/or misrepresent the truth. Those political views are broadly identified as coming from the Left, which represents many variants of collectivism.
For those on the Right (which represents individualism, freedom, and capitalism), the current state of politics has become so irrational and beyond understanding that it is almost impossible to accept that the tyranny we are experiencing is real. “Everything is upside down or totally backwards,” has become a familiar refrain expressing this frustration and disbelief.
To understand the madness of the political Left, it is necessary to know how those on the Left think. One of the most difficult concepts to grasp is that those on the Left are strictly ideological, not philosophical. Ideology originates strictly in the mind, unconcerned with the facts of reality. A working philosophy on the other hand, is disciplined by the facts of reality.
In philosophy, these two opposing ways of thinking are contrasted as the ‘primacy of consciousness’ (in which reality is not perceived by consciousness but is created by consciousness) and the ‘primacy of existence’ (in which reality exists irrespective of anyone’s consciousness).
In politics, it is the Left that relies on ideology, while the Right relies on philosophical principles.
Consequently, this conflict between Left and Right manifests itself in a battle of definitions and concepts, ranging from the definition of freedom to the definition of democracy. While those on the Left are obsessed with “defending democracy,” many on the Right insist that freedom is the primary value to be defended.
While freedom is indeed the primary value, the surprising truth is that freedom and democracy go hand-in-hand.
Unfortunately, even when the truth is told, most people cannot recognize it or distinguish it from all of the false perceptions about politics. To be understood in a light that is Just Right, truth must be discerned; it requires a process of thought and discipline that too few understand: philosophy.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
