4.1) The Problem of Getting Attention for Science#3

Under the OPTION I the obsession is to F2-do everything possible, so that the F3-output to other people enhances one's mass-attractivity, up to being able to F4-manage more and more people as a successful F5-entrepreneur, who has his target group under F6-control. Then any F1-input indicating a loss in the expected return on investment loses its meaning. With that one-track minded focus typical for the 2-2 ideology and ignoring its consequences, one cannot ethically F7-influence each other even in view of F8-necessities, let alone towards some F9-basic, substantial overview. That is now all left to the social media which synchronize the inner personally-neutral mass thinking with the mainstream trend. Name an institution which does not exclude what it cannot F6-control under OPTION I! Organized science is rightly concerned about how to avoid publishing papers with errors up to what will not turn out to be politically correct! Thus what is preceding its cultivated formal trap is outcast in the attempt to secure the comfort zone of its ivory towers, and similarly, whoever challenges its scribes to consider transcending their trap before the point of NO return is even more fiercely prosecute, for in their pretentious delusions, they are blind to that outcome and rather invest in pre-trans-traps, and miss the point of no return at a loss after having mobbed and worse, those who had a solution in time! That is how organized science#0-2-1 has become part of the problem; science#2 scribes usurp superior political power reducing science#1 to being its serf and science#0 to spinning its fig leafs, so scapegoats must be sacrificed where the spin can no longer infotain F1, F7-9 of real human beings.

In order to face the need for science#3, to which science#2 is opposing under OPTION I, it has to model what I have indicated in the paragraph above to the point of providing a basis for real human beings for giving priority and meaning to their OPTION I and OPTION II in life-practical ways, relevant to their innate urge for life- through task-fulfillment. To face that challenge, the relevant concepts are now operationally available for each of the possible 1728 oegp's, as well as the procedure to identify the appropriate oegp for any given human system, ranging from individuals up to their relationships, teams, organizations and cultures:

Generally speaking, OPTION I demands restricting our expression so it is seen as exclusively 4-peaceful and to otherwise having to face 1-very bad consequences. In case of Jesus Christ, that was crucifixion! Jan Hus was lured to appear before the Council of Constance with the promise to receive a fair F1-hearing with the hidden agenda, so he could to be burnt on the stake 1415. The Jews under the Nazis were gassed as scapegoats for having lost World War I. Stalin, Mao and the Kim tribe & Co. applied random terror to maintain their OPTION I hierarchies in 4-peace. Under the Islamic State the "others" are beheaded. In more 'civilized' areas you get mobbed as who you are, and if you do not succumb, you are outcast from any job that earns you a decent living. In addition to such severe collective restrictions, each and every human being has 8 "dark inner evil voices", the non-essential states, individually differently seducing some of the F1-9, where they try to overpower the 16 essential resources you have to ethical fulfill your life in §1-L3 with who you X=innately are and have being created for.

In short, in any human collective a critical number of real people need to at least have the personal F1-EXIT strategy in place to become open for F1-input beyond what then OPTION I mental operating system allows so as not to collapse, like failed states such Syria-Iraq 2014, to become part of such human catastrophes and chaos. A sufficient meaningful exchange of getting, understanding and responding to the content and the meaning of each other's forms of expression towards a sufficient mutual understanding towards synergy beyond OPTION I is necessary for a desirable future! Even rich and educated people, such as on the Titanic, which sank over the lacking O-orientation in all the hypes about M-manipulating common sense and the laws of nature, fall into the OPTION I pre-trans-traps, often more than down to earth!

Are you intellectually brainwashed to not understand and instead hide behind the critique of the above video for being less than perfect?

Once having the necessary concepts operationally available for any real human system, the remaining problem is how to implement them with a sufficient number of god willed people for it before the point of NO return.

The antidote to conscience#3, the social sciences#2 are a theme focused disciplines of academic disciplines. They are concerned with the study of the social#2 "life" of human groups of individuals, and cultural interactions among various groups. That includes the disciplines of anthropology, geography, political science, psychology and several others. But in all of them, the individual lifefulfillment#3 is demeaned in the name of statistical  objectivity#2. However, statistics only makes sense about content-free data about same things with a relevant time of duration; opinions are not of that sort! Because of the success of science#1, there are all kinds of pseudo-science#0-#2 mimicking science#1 in a cargo cult fashion. They follow the order of forms like Darwin did diligently, but not with hidden ideological agendas such as what turned out as social Darwinian 0-0 ideology appropriate for the history of art and philosophy but not for real life. In a typical pretentious manner philosophy projects its quality as superior to everything, on everything else and ignores the real nature of human being! The humanities gather data, to somehow model the opinions about their topics and words with the hidden agenda to "prove" 0-2 philosophies leading to 2-2 ideologies. But this pseudo-scientific approach does not converge in any substantial, timeless laws applicable in all space. Compared to the hard science#1 these kind of pseudo-sciences up to spiritualities of all kinds haven't found out anything beyond what humans can manipulate and thus they haven't got anywhere since antiquities. But what happens is, at an even more mundane level, we get experts on everything when an intellectual sounds like sort of scientific. In fact that just creates the information flood about those "experts", mainly ambiguous opinions about facts, events and each others opinions. And that is no science, that should be compared with, in terms of the functional technology, the successfully progressing sciences of nature#1.

Scientists#2 write stuff, even just copy paste from others, about what they think has the potential to become a best-seller or please their peers. Maybe true, may not be true. But hardly anything has been demonstrated one way or another to be, at the end of the day, relevant for real people's lifefulfillment. But they go arguing and writing about it and make up all their information flood and infotainment to appear like that is science usurp positions of power say in ethical boards, prejudging real scientific experts in terms of their psycho-political topic to support their opinions and mass-attractive myths. In this way neuroscience is misused to "prove" Freudian slips, the lowest level of psychology. This kind of pseudo-science has been  called cargo cult science by the Physics Prof. Richard Feynman; its participants lack scientific integrity,  principles of scientific thought and think-systems that corresponds to the quality they pretend to be scientific about in terms of understanding relationship truth with utter honesty and a  kind of leaning not just speculatively, but also backwards from feedback from sources that really matter and are beyond human manipulation such as the laws#1 of nature, basic human rights and duties#2, aesthetics#0, and those for personally relevant lifefulfillment#3.

Rather than acknowledging the limitations of their forms of expression, misguiding them to non-sequiturs and category errors pseudo-science defend their expert's status in mass-attractive fields. And those present their findings as truths, just pretending to employing the same rigor as in the physical sciences#1 with their spin. When it comes to human systems, that ignores what leads to life, which in its fulfillment is individual, as what the everywhere missing science#3 is concerned about. Among all kinds of myths and pseudo-science, those concerned hardly realize anymore when they have been irresponsible some trusting "God will forgive them for not knowing what they evoke." Consider for instance all the mainstream economic "truisms", presented in broad layman terms, which have largely governed economic policy thinking in recent decades, particularly in the Western hemisphere.

Alan Greenspan had to publically denounce the bottom line of economy as an error after he had led the FED with and thus the world into the financial crisis of 2008 with it! Needless to say, most truisms of science#2, are kind of "Flat Earth Societies" 2-1 ideologies that defy common sense, let alone any rigorous scientific analysis of their relevance other than divide to rule. Some economists had warned years earlier that their discipline was just posing as a true science. Here's a very insightful excerpt from the 1974 Economic Sciences Nobel prize acceptance speech by Friedrich von Hayek (appropriately called "The Pretence of Knowledge"): "It seems to me that this failure of the economists to guide policy more successfully is closely connected with their propensity to imitate as closely as possible the procedures of the brilliantly successful physical sciences - an attempt which in our field may lead to outright error. It is an approach which has come to be described as the 'scientistic' attitude - an attitude which, as I defined it some thirty years ago, 'is decidedly unscientific in the true sense of the word, since it involves a mechanical and uncritical application of habits of thought to fields different from those in which they have been formed." Even Paul Krugman, a high priest of mainstream economics, is critical of his own kind. However, in his view the problem is that there are too many solutions on how to solve the world's economic problems, instead of, everyone just following the advice of his or her conscience#3 with which we would all be saved from the thinking catastrophes that turn into human catastrophes where science#2 oversteps the limit of its relevance behind the fig leaf of complexity and too many solutions mainly due to its category errors and non-sequiturs in the foot step of philosophy. The divergence of pretentious intellectuals' opinions is yet another indictment of the lack of scientific rigor and precision that permeates the economics profession today as well as psychology and at the bottom of science#2, philosophy!

Widely accepted beliefs in myths masquerading as science have consequences. We should have a clear-headed debate as a society on how to get our economies back on track! In January 1988, a month before his death, Feynman warned us against becoming arrogant and complacent in our current stage of progress, which could have dire implications on future generations: "We are at the very beginning of time for the human race. It is not unreasonable that we grapple with problems. But there are tens of thousands of years in the future. Our responsibility is to do what we can, learn what we can, improve the solutions and pass them on. If we suppress all discussion, all criticism, proclaiming 'This is the answer, my friends; man is saved!' we will doom humanity for a long time to the chains of authority, confined to the limits of our present imagination. It has been done so many times before..." But this time it has the potential to be the last time - it could be you who in the end makes the difference...

Context