A World of ideas: The Dictionary of Important Ideas and Thinkers

[ananymousse]

I recently read this book and absolutely loved it. It was written by a man named Chris Rohmann. I suggest it to anyone who is wanting to increase not only their vocabulary but their mental capacity. The book started off great with prose, rhyme, and reason beyond any I have endured. It's simplicity is exceeded only by its complexity on the basis of being alphabetically inclined within its own point to not only act as a dictionary of ideas but as a philosophic view above the philosophy it simplifies in easily read context.

I would have to stress the authors regression into anger over some ideas of thought which the author fails to address as slight corruptions of previously held ideology. For instance when it compares socialism to communism and marxism it fails to identify marxism as a philosophy and the other two as government ideology predisposed to the errors of individualism's greed. He also fails to make the same differentiations upon capitalism which is inherently marked for greed and the mistreatment of mankind.

Furthermore the author instills values of respect, justice, injustice, and a wide variety of emotional propaganda designed to hypnotize the reader. My complaint on this notion is there would be no need for that and it's effects would be more easily read if this basis were configured or reflected into todays similar views on these exact subjects. This would prize the individual and original thoughts above the mentality of group beliefs corrupted by the ultimate conclusions and evidence society itself has corrupted from these ideas.

If the author were here I would have some words with him over the elegance of identifying Freud's inspiration by talking all Horny. Then later compliment him on the contingencies behind newly developed ways of educational thought.

I might have read somewhere in there that some experimentalist thought a long time ago motion creates heat. The author points out the clerical error in thought and never fully completes it.

All in all it took me 3 hours to read the first 20 pages. By then I knew the story and finished the rest in about 4. Checking his validity of Neitzsche I requited him a fool for not elaborating upon the birds of prey speech he delivers as an exit.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

For instance when it compares socialism to communism and marxism it fails to identify marxism as a philosophy and the other two as government ideology predisposed to the errors of individualism's greed.

If you're going to contradict a published author you need to state your case. You can't just say he's wrong and expect anyone to believe you.

Socialism works best in small communities in which everyone sincerely regards everyone else as kin, and therefore the entire enterprise can function more-or-less as a family. There is no need for formal government in this milieu, beyond a beloved grandpa to whose judgment everyone defers. There have been many small societies that functioned satisfactorily this way, particularly in the Paleolithic Era and in the Neolithic Era prior to the building of the first Stone Age cities.

He also fails to make the same differentiations upon capitalism which is inherently marked for greed and the mistreatment of mankind.

Again, you're just expressing your own bias without providing any supporting evidence. This is not scholarship, it's just name-calling.

Capitalism in its pure form is nothing more or less than the devolution of the management of a large, prosperous community's surplus wealth (or "capital") to the people who are involved in the daily work of creating it, rather than allowing it to be managed by a separate ruling class who do not necessarily understand the enterprises that create the capital and whose focus is, therefore, on retaining power rather than maximizing surplus wealth.

The Paradigm Shift to an industrial economy increased the productivity of human workers by several orders of magnitude, since the defining technology of the Industrial Revolution was the conversion of the chemical energy in fossil fuel into the mechanical energy to drive industrial production processes. This caused a concomitant increase in the human race's surplus wealth, notably freeing up more than 90% of the earth's population from their traditional "jobs" as subsistence farmers, allowing entire new industries to spring up, creating goods and services that were hitherto unimaginable except to the tiny aristocrat class. By the end of the 19th century the U.S. economy toggled from scarcity-driven to surplus-driven, marked by the emergence of the advertising industry, convincing us to buy things that we don't need, but want and can afford. IMHO, Santa Claus is the symbol of the Industrial Era: buy things for people that they didn't even know they wanted. The Coca-Cola ad campaign reinvented a jolly, overweight, gift-bearing Santa, telling us we're so damn wealthy that we can afford to buy refreshments that have to be served cold in winter.

Sure, the capitalism of the 19th century, when the human race's industrial infrastructure was being built, was marked by greed and the exploitation of employees. But you conveniently overlook the fact that that greed and exploitation was already rampant. Capitalism did not create it, it merely used it to make a lot of cool new stuff that the "exploited" people could buy with the income from their salaried jobs. Look back to the late Iron Age, in medieval Europe. The lords were greedy and the peasants were exploited. At least in the new capitalistic economy they had shorter working hours (72-hour weeks for an industrial worker versus 100 or more for a yeoman farmer), some disposable income to spend as they chose, and some products upon which they could spend it.

The capitalism of the 21st century is well on its way to a new model. The megacorporations are dying off as information technology turns "big" from an advantage to a disadvantage. The official work week is 40 hours and very few people exceed 60. An increasing number of people are self-employed. And something that would have been unimaginable to the factory workers Dickens wrote about: We get to sit down while we work!

. . . . This would prize the individual and original thoughts above the mentality of group beliefs corrupted by the ultimate conclusions and evidence society itself has corrupted from these ideas.

You ignore biology. Humans are a pack-social species like our closest cousins, the gorillas and chimpanzees. It's an instinct wired into our synapses by our DNA. An obligate carnivore with no fangs or claws absolutely has to hunt cooperatively. We make decisions collectively and the individual who bucks the trend is a liability to the pack.

Times have changed and we've used our singularly enormous forebrain to override instinctive behavior with reasoned and learned behavior. In the bargain we've also reprogrammed ouselves into a herd-social species, living in harmony and cooperation with anonymous strangers because we understand that this makes life better for everybody, instead of a pack-social species in which each extended-family unit battles with the people in the next valley for food, other resources, and dominance. But the instincts are still there. Just glance at any day's newspaper. If we attempt to actually deny them instead of merely negotiating with them, we're asking for trouble.

 

[ananymousse]

Oh you act like you wrote the book

Perhaps Somebody knew this before setting off into this argument. The only person I consider capable of true debate. So loose you hidden emotions and begin typing them!

I agree with socialism working in small communities which is why in my argument I expressed the corruption of government uptake of the idea as contrast. Just like in capitalism I could expand to say individual ownership of business is a cause for greed in the human condition, but in government today we have blockage of trade caused by fear of war over these different ideologies alone. As if we feel these men under the ideologies are not men and do not deserve our goods. This is not capitalist! It is fear followed by stupidity!

You could banish all of it by allowing every person a savings account with compound interest in which the interest (weather used or not) accumulates insurance to be used for the house car or body itself. And we would still have the purchase of it monthly if needed.

There would be no need for physical cash able to be lost. The government could tax none of it. It would all already be theirs in the bank open for small fluctuations within the insurance bracket with proper algorithm.

Humans are not pack animals! Their individuality rests within their art! Fear spread from discontent from individual, to social, to government, to world ideology causes pain and is both the greatest destroyer and benefactor of the type of inspiration I call art!

That is the way this great book makes me feel because the author feels the same.