Fear Of Thinking
Reluctance to think for oneself!
A chat around the fire…
Why is it that some topics trigger emotions when they are brought up for discussion? Rather than explore ideas that are contrary to conventional wisdom, the reaction to the introduction of these ideas is to shut down the conversation. Certain topics cause some to experience negative emotions, so rather than discuss them, most would rather not, and instead continue along conversational lines that are light and essentially meaningless. Meaningful conversations are avoided like the plague.
We all know that to bring up religion or politics is taboo in mixed, polite company. These topics can cause division, unless the people sharing the discussion are all like-minded. Bringing up these topics is the best way to end an otherwise enjoyable evening get together, sending some hastily to the exits. Or the perpetrator may be tossed out to save the party from ruin.
There are other topics that may cast a pall over an otherwise enjoyable dinner party. Take the issue of vaccines for example. With the incidence of vaccine harms today, likely everyone knows of someone who has had a vaccine injured child. This is especially true in the case of autism. The statistics are clear when the rise in the incidence in autism is corelated to the introduction of the MMR vaccine on the childhood schedule. The more children are injected with MMR vaccines, the higher the rise in autism rates. The data is not in dispute, but some people do not want to hear it. If they accept the data, they can only come to one conclusion, those who make MMR and those who inject it into children are intentionally causing harm to children. Doctors and pharmacists go along with the injection programs because of the incentives. Conclusion? Something is terribly wrong with our medical institutions. For more information on vaccines watch Vaxxed, Vaxxed II and Vaxxed III. And follow Sasha Latypova’s Substack channel. Also follow Katherine Watt’s Bailiwick News on Substack for her legal investigation into vaccine manufacturers lawfare protections.
Another topic that will quickly sabotage a family reunion is the Holocaust. This is an extremely emotional topic due to the conditioning we have been subjected to through books, movies, personal testimonies and museums. We have all been indoctrinated with the myth of the 6 million when there is absolutely no forensic evidence for such a crime. The women in my own family being more emotional, believe the “official” indoctrination while the men in my family question the logic. This topic is extremely polarizing because of emotional connections. No one wants to believe we have been lied to. But if we have been lied to, is it not better to get the lie out in the open than to refuse to discuss it? I recently saw a clip with Donald Trump talking about the Holocaust. He said that everyone knows what happened. He does not acknowledge that there is ample dispute to the event based on forensic investigations. Trump assumes everyone knows what to believe. Trump asserts the assumptive close to the matter. Anyone who disagrees is a Holocaust denier; God forbid.
Refusing to discuss certain topics and shunning those who bring them up is a result of the effective long-term application of emotional propaganda. The objective of targeted emotional propaganda is clearly aimed at making these topics taboo for discussion in polite society. Dissenters of the “official” line are ostracized and ridiculed.
Language is essentially weaponized against those who dissent. Safe and effective is an emotional appeal, promoting the idea that we need to be “safe” to protect others. If we don’t wear a mask we put others at risk. No one wants to be responsible for putting immune compromised grand parents at risk. So we all succumb to group think.
But what does the data say? Does anyone look into it when a TV doctor is telling us what to think? My observation is that people are too lazy or fearful to think for themselves. This is especially true when some so-called expert tells us what is what. These experts have years of education and alphabet soups after their names. It is audacious to even think that a layman should question their opinions. So most let others with credentials do their thinking for them.
One of the most divisive topics discussed on social media today is that of the model of the universe. We essentially have two opposing schools of thought. The Copernican heliocentric model, and the ancient geocentric model. Our schools teach the heliocentric model with the Earth as a globe, and make no mention of the competing geocentric model. NASA spends billions convincing us that we can solve the problems and travel through space to explore planets, mine asteroids, and man the space station in order to perform experiments in zero gravity.
We were told that we went to the moon six times, and that twelve astronauts walked on the moon. But what happened to the forensic evidence demonstrating that these missions were successful? We were told that the telemetry data tapes were overwritten because of budget constraints, and that the moon mission technology was destroyed. If the story of the missions was true, how could we have been so careless as to lose the data and destroy the technology? I call BS. Bart Sibrel’s documentary A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon makes a very convincing argument against the veracity of the moon mission stories. Anyone applying logic to the facts can see through the phony moon missions.
If the moon missions were faked, what is NASA doing planning missions to Mars? And why do we have Hollywood movies backing up the idea? Is it a case of NASA lying and Hollywood swearing by it? Are the two in cahoots to keep the moola flowing? Sending men to Mars is absurd. Months traveling in zero gravity would make astronauts muscles atrophy. They wouldn’t be able to do anything once they got there. Has anybody seriously thought this through?
There are a number of brilliant Flat Earthers publishing their ideas on TikTok. I like Ereko White, Apothicari, The Fittest Flat Earther and others making the case for Flat Earth. Flat Earthers are a growing community. Flat Earth Dave has a popular app that connects Flat Earthers with information and allows them to connect with each other. There are also a number of rather arrogant Globers who insist the Flat Earthers are lying, but they offer no proof of the heliocentric model. They only attack the Flat Earthers with ridicule. Recently author and respected scientist and researcher Michael Tellinger made a video explaining his position on the topic, and he relates the ridicule he experienced for merely stating his point of view.
As long as we are reluctant, resistant or fearful of discussing important topics, we will remain ignorant, wrapped inside our protective information bubbles. Thinking should not be made a burden to the thinker. If we heap ridicule on independent thinkers, are we doing humanity a service by self censoring?
I maintain that there is a certain cult that wants us to remain in a state of ignorance and confusion. Those who subscribe to my channel and read my posts know what I am talking about. My hope is that the critical thinkers among us will do their part to wake up the normies. Meaning those who choose to remain wilfully ignorant, in fear of thinking for themselves.
great article, thnx! very recently I got into a spat with a fairly outspoken substack author for mentioning the idea of earth not moving through space at ~1.000 Mph. she found that preposterous, and said that I also was preposterous (at which point I then un-subb'd). we should be allowed to ponder ideas, no matter how far-out they may be. and in the mean time do research, read, listen to and speak with others about them: it's how we develop(ed). or at least some of us, I suppose ;-))
Good to see you mention the main topics that send people over the edge.
People should be willing to at least listen to both sides of the discussion but sadly it rarely happens.
Most people have been so indoctrinated on one side or another that any open honest discussion usually ends up with people walking out of the room and you will never hear from them again.
I will listen to everyone and ask many questions, which can end up with people walking out of the room also. That's all I ask is to be able to present my views on a topic and whatever happens happens. But in my travels Religion is the worse topic to have a reasonable discussion about.
Lot's of baggage comes with that one. If people are secure with their beliefs then they should be able to openly talk about them. I find that isn't the case. So we move on in life and have to accept. It can be pretty lonely when you out there telling the truth as you see it. Jesus said wide and spacious is the road leading to death while small and cramped is the road leading to life. If you ever been hiking you will get the point.