Speaking to - Talking at

[Truthslave]

Speaking to - Talking at


What should one make of a communication, where the same mode
satisfies so many purposes?

The same mode, a sharp stick used by untold numbers, each
seeking for himself whatever is claimed with this practice.
The same mode, where each believes whatever he is told,
defining himself by what he now knows. His knowledge of,
taken to mean an understanding of.

Called science, each looks to become its master, on the
cutting edge with a cutting tongue. Their knowledge,
this behavior, one.

Called influence, it is practiced wherever it can be excused.
Operating where it won't be noticed, amidst the cacophony of
the crowds, lost in open plans, required as routine, demanded
as influence. As a habit of sharp tricks, contempt and loathing
are its only rules.

Its keen disciples hang out on the periphery, as circumstance
dictates. Never quite disclosing themselves, a coward's
communication where the practitioners also assume a kind of
invisibility for themselves, so invisible they won't see
themselves or what they become.


Speaking To - with its old fashion idea of dialog, exchange,
courtesy, respect, bartered meanings. So primitive that.

Talking at - from a position of forced assumptions and false
author ity. With a blind belief in their position, a dogged
acceptance of their paper titles, their docile learning, to
much for them to question.

Talking at - from a position which allows no comeback,
and thus no feedback. No feedback, so clever that.

To those cognizant of its use, it amounts to little more than
another form to bad manners. Know what i mean dog. One ignores
them the best one can and soldier on.

To those without this awareness it might be taken as a test,
since this is how it also justifies itself. A test of reason,
as this old act sets out to confound reason.

The same behavior with so many justifications.

----------------------------------------------------

Thought experiment.


You are a lab rat in an experiment where one mad scientist
after another looks to conduct the same experiment.

How do you respond?

These 'scientists' are seemingly unknown to each other.
Surprisingly each believes himself to be the first, as
their 'behavior' reflect a single seat of learning.

Given enough time as lab rat, you too might become expert.
Watching as one after another, announces his presence
with the same cue, ding dong. Watching as yet another
unwitting pawn, fails to see how their function has been
compromised, by their use of the same cue. Ting-a-ling.
Nothing clever here, except the real reasons for this
blunt instrument.

How should you respond?

The experiment is called influence. Covert and apparently
invisible. Yet as the enduring focus, if this were still
invisible it would have arrived at a conclusion before now.
Who sees time. Yes, how long has it been now? The latest
can only see, in that liner way, his influence.

There are so many adapting to influence, no one is truly
immune. Our stooges won't see themselves, in the same way
they have been taught see others. Who trains who, might
also be seen as the real question. The classic scapegoat
used to train the responses of the majority and through him,
their docile resignation. There is no end of convolution
to these experiments.

The experiment is called behavior, and on the surface
hinges on an untainted emotional response. Is this necessary
quality still probable? The experiment continues as though
it were. Is the sanctity of emotions recognized in this quest
for 'desired behavior'? Behavior divorced from emotions.
Who would think like this? Who would think this likely?

Behavior. One might as well call it habit, since there
is no need of thought, just the excuse and the trained
reflex, or the conditions and circumstance where the
selfish sees only what he has to gain, and not the others
playing for much higher stakes.

One after another continues with the same answers. Egged
on by the same Meta. Simple answers looking to provoke a
response []. I guess I failed that test[]. Few in this
confusion of purpose see themselves or their change.
Adapted and loving it.

Well its something to do, isn't it? Something for the want
of something more meaningful to do. This one man industry,
a queen bee giving rise to many.

The experiment is called deception, used as a way to promote
contempt and loathing, or stress and poor health, or manage
that sought distance between perception and ignorance.

Taking its knowledge from the ideal case, it is ill suited to
actual circumstance, yet it continues unchallenged. 'For was
it not written?'

Transfixed by simple ideas, each in this experiment is told
what is necessary to control him. As such, what they are told
serves also as a subtle reflection of their own characters.
They only need to be told what they find easiest to understand.
Which says much for how we are controlled. Just keep it simple.

The lab rat, being only a rat, can't possible see the
experiment. Remarkably in all this 'science', there is no
room for feedback. The actors are deliberately placed at a
distance from the subject. A distance of conscience. A
series of discreet farces prevents the actor from seeing
himself. Each is adamant of his invisibility, adamant of
his knowledge and so loses himself in that idea. Drifting
as a decline in our necessary inhibitions gives rise to the
unforeseen. Lost. What are we, believing ourselves to be
invisible, not noticing where that line is drawn. What do
we become.

Without feedback as if this were undefined. There is non to
say different. Without feedback, so the organism is undone.

Adapting to what you are told, to whatever you are told,
what is the likely outcome... at its extremes the mad
scientists smile, gazing on for the easy answers. Loving what
they see of the dutifully occupied. Doing first before later
expecting the same to be done.

The environment is there to be exploited, and so it is.
The same experiment with so many justifications.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Defined by knowledge,

..so each needs to practice what he believes distinguishes him
from the group. He is special and this is what make him so.
This is what he knows. In so doing each exposes his control,
announces his presence, outs himself. He might as well wear
a badge, such is his uniformity.

Needing to hide, he shares this behavior under so many
other guises. In this way the covert becomes common place,
reckless, ordinary. Now he is only special by what he
understands....

How many understand? The formula once written is too easily
learned. Any fool can ape this behavior and so every fool
tries. This blunt stick is no saber, but everybody wants to
be a Jedi.

--

"This is not the fool you were looking for - move along, move along"