These professors are the literal equivalent of the jungle shaman. We should not be surprised that so many of our youth join gangs. We taught them that it was good to join a group. We taught them they were not important except in relation to a group. We taught them that they were unimportant so they believe others are unimportant too--hence crime and gang warfare.
If we had taught them to value themselves as unique individuals who are worthy of respect, perhaps they would have sought a different road. Indeed, if we analyze the criminal mind, we find that criminals develop (early in life) intense confusion over their roles in their collective--their collective identity. Confused expectations, a belief that they were not important to others, led to frustration in their relationships with others--leading eventually to a dismissal of the rights of others and then to their crimes. This is particularly true of mass murderers and sex offenders. Had we taught them that they were valuable and that hope was possible, perhaps they might have recognized that others could be valuable as well. It would take far less effort to teach our children one fundamental truth: the value of the Individual life. This simple lesson, practiced daily by parents and teachers, would provide a fulfilling part of their education.
Yet, personal identity is the central concern of all young people. The schools ignore it because the teachers have little in the way of personal identity themselves and they don’t know how to get it. They don’t even know how to start.
Personal identity can only grow by means of clear thinking. The Individual needs to have a sense of his own efficacy regarding his ability to understand. He needs this understanding to live his life. Without reason, there is nothing to inform him about his own worth. Without reason, there is no individual.
Yet, the individual seeking a sense of his own personal identity runs up against a brick wall. Not only is he told that he is not important to others but he is also told that he should not want to be important to himself. To support this view, collectivists tell him he should not want to “be better” than others, that he should not want to rise, become rich, learn advanced knowledge and “think” that he is good in any way. Such ideas are a sign, they tell him, that he is not better but worse than others. The day he discovers that these “lessons” are intended to make him both a sacrificial victim who must suffer for others (and fail at helping others) but also the source of the suffering of others (when he tries to do well) is the day he understands their methods. The moment he realizes that moral “double jeopardy” is what collectivists want for him is the moment he realizes that collectivism is a trap and a sham which must be totally rejected in all its forms.
Original Thinking
Original thinking requires the independent mind, it requires a selective focus on facts and the discovery of new principles. Original thinking is not engaged in a vacuum or in a ritualistic orgy of mindless dancing. It is anathema to the collective and its leaders. This is why they attack reason, elevate mysticism and faith and denigrate anyone who presumes himself "egoistic" enough to think for himself.
The original thinker is one who breaks his own ground when it comes to production and creativity. He is able to expand knowledge by means of diligent investigation and scientific method. He can identify principles and find new meaning that leads to better ideas and better products and services. The original thinker, above all, rejects most of the ideas that are derived from mysticism and floating knowledge because he knows that nothing new can come from these ideas.
If one wants to teach men a subject that could save the world; if one wants to introduce to man the proper use of his mind, one would hurry to introduce logic to as many people as possible through as many media as possible. Indeed, there would be a “Logic Channel” running on cable TV 24-hours a day and advertising rates would be very lucrative. Yet, a culture that holds ESP, emotions, ghosts, miracles, and mystical experiences as more valuable and formidable than logic is headed for disaster. That we are still in a pre-Dark Ages period when it comes to the mind is a scandal that no modern person should accept.
The original thinker knows that his mind is his tool of survival. He knows that he must use the best thinking methods he can find in order to understand reality. The original thinker knows that reality is immutable, that it functions according to laws and that these laws must be discovered. He knows that clear thinking and logic provide the best methods for acquiring knowledge. The original thinker, if logic had not been discovered, would have discovered it.
Collectivist thinkers, men who claim that their actions and words are motivated by a love for man, consider logic to be an unimportant subject to teach. Truth for the collectivist is whatever you want it to be so long as it is collectively acceptable. Modern philosophy, a product of primordial mysticism and collectivism, has taken logic and twisted it out of all proportion, turning it into a game that has nothing to do with reality but only with exercises for the mind. This has effectively barred the door to the understanding that logic is really a tool for dealing with reality in a non-contradictory way. Self-contradiction is the hallmark of the liar, the cheat, the witch doctor and the dictator. Non-contradiction is the hallmark of the Individualist, the scientist, the entrepreneur and the loving parent.
Integrity
The mind and the body are the two inseparable components of the individual. Every part of the body has a function whose goal is life. Yet, collectivism preaches a mind-body split. It considers the body to be evil because it is of this earth and the mind elevated because (according to collectivists) it belongs to a mystical realm. I submit that the mind-body split is a crucial enemy of mankind that not only puts forth false alternatives for man but also disintegrates his ability to be moral. It forces man to split himself into two warring camps. The result is confusion, self-doubt and paralysis.
The mind-body split has many names in the history of philosophy: the mind-body dichotomy, the spirit versus matter split, the practical versus the impractical, etc. In essence, this view postulates a world composed of two elements, matter and spirit. Here "matter" represents the material, unclean, corrupt element of the universe and "spirit" represents the spiritual, pure element. According to this view, man's spiritual essence wages a continual battle against his material "corrupt" essence.
There is nothing base about the material world. It simply is what it is. There is nothing spiritual about the mind; it is simply the organ whose purpose is to comprehend reality. The mind-body split is a fallacy because there is nothing in the universe that prohibits mind and body from being integrated into one whole. Its premises are a basic and fundamental error.
For centuries, the most poisonous manifestation of the mind-body split has been moral dualism, the idea that the world or the universe is divided into two camps, good versus evil. This view evades the very real truth that a thing or person cannot be intrinsically good or evil. There is no proof that the universe is made up of a cosmic struggle between a good spirit and an evil one.
Moral dualism, however, allows collectivists to improperly label individuals and groups as good or bad by nature. It clouds our ability to understand true good and evil as they relate to an individual’s evaluation of reality. It is easy to brand a particular group or Individual as intrinsically bad, to be fought against regardless of the very real character of each. It is easy to ignore or persecute people because we have branded them as inferior or lazy. It is easy to consider our enemies as "sons of darkness". It is easy to attack a person as our enemy or as a traitor because he has taken his own course in life.
It is easy to manipulate those closest to us in life by branding them as bad because they happen to disagree with us. It is easy to criticize someone about the choices he has made. And it is easy to persecute people as selfish because they happen to want something we don't want for them. It is easy to ostracize a person, to denigrate his character, to deliberately misrepresent his words and actions by pointing out that what he seeks is for his own personal pleasure or goal. It is easy to treat a child as bad bec
ause we are trying to control his life. It is easy to attack any person who seems to be pursuing his own values and purpose, in contrast to what we think he should pursue. All you have to do is say, “He is bad.”
In our society, many people verbally attack atheists, free thinkers, Objectivists, geniuses, the rich, true beauty, the old, the young, the innocent, the intellectual and the supposedly ignorant. The mind-body split, and moral dualism, allow us to discriminate against anyone who dissents from commonly accepted beliefs – or who happens to be just a little different.
On the contrary, integrity is the full use of both mind and body. It is the successful integration of the mind and body and the realization that there really is no separation between them. The individualist seeks integration.
Objectivity
The ability to understand reality is a capacity that is part of man's nature. But that capacity is only a potential if man does not advance to the conceptual level. Concepts bridge the divide between percepts and ethical action.
Concepts are derived by mentally differentiating entities according to their characteristics and then integrating them into like units.[1] This process enables the practice of generalization (principles, laws and theories) and advances man’s mind to the level of abstract thinking.
The history of philosophy has been a concerted attack on this ability. Man is the victim of the mystic philosopher's hatred of the mind and of Kant’s effort to save religion. These supposed men of the mind have used their intellectual abilities to teach us that the mind is helpless and that it cannot really know reality. They have waged a war against man's conceptual capacity; against reason, reality and certainty.
Those among us who have used our minds to achieve something in the "real" world have violated the most consistent principle taught by philosophy throughout the centuries. We have not given up our minds. We do not bow down, kneel, give up, give in and pray. This is particularly true of Americans, many of whom have created great wealth. It explains why Americans are thought of as crude, vulgar, and impolite by Europeans. The source of our crudeness is that, culturally, we are realistic. We function in this world. We act in this world. We do not, for the most part, submit to the opinions of those who would deny our importance.
However, as assertive as Americans are, we are also the victims of collectivist philosophical teachings. For the most part, we accept the teachings of modern philosophy and all the poison of collectivism. We practice a commonsense approach to thinking that seeks a measure of objectivity, but we have yet to discover, consistently, just what objectivity means. We are the first to ask for "the facts," "truth," "honesty." But, the problem is that we are also the first to rationalize the influence of mysticism and collectivism in our lives. We go to church, pray to God and follow the Ten Commandments, etc., while we strive for achievement and understanding in our professions. We also, like many Europeans, rush to compromise with collectivism, assuring collectivists that our pursuit of material reality is merely another way to achieve the goals of the collectivists.
In human relations, when it comes to independent thinking whose goal is to apprehend reality, one finds that educators (American or European) are very difficult to deal with. Don't ask them to consider facts and truth, or to operate according to the burden of proof principle. Most of their thinking is loose association and it is difficult to get them to focus on two key principles of effective thought: that things are what they are and we can trust our senses. These people are so rooted in collectivism that to actually question the validity of a commonly held belief is a near impossibility. They prefer ideas that question existence and the validity of the senses. They become the interrogators of the thinking individual; preferring to call knowledge of reality naïve, independently derived and therefore not worth consideration.
This is why we see today the preponderance of group thinking, dogmatic thinking, moral commandments, conspiracy theories, ESP, prophesy, cultism, belief in miracles, belief in alien beings, doom and gloom and mysticism--not to mention total confusion.
Becoming an Individualist
In describing Individualism, I like the metaphor of flight. It seems like a cliché, but at the risk of being trite, flight for me represents freedom in a way unlike any other activity or emotion. In the world of collectivism, man is tethered to the earth and bound by traditions that mean nothing today. On earth, there is only strife and conflict, criticism and exhortation, fear and menacing, disapproval and terror. But flight provides perspective, a view of the world’s vastness.
In the world of Individualism there is free movement and joy, the ability to understand and see life from a perspective that recognizes the smallness of ideas that “type” and disenfranchise and the largeness of ideas that liberate the mind of the individual. With Individualism, there are no restrictions, no limits – just freedom and happiness and movement.
In fact, Individualism represents the possibility of tremendous achievement for a man, because through Individualism, a person is not manipulated by fear of beasts (human or otherwise) and is not the slave of philosophies that brand him as evil. There is no Original Sin for the Individualist.
For those who want to escape collectivism's influence, the critical issue is how to effect healing, how to escape the negative devices that collectivism has invented to control them. How does one (each individual) remove the fears, confusions and blocks created by collectivism?
1. Start by improving your ability to think about yourself, to introspect. You might be surprised how seldom you do this. There is nothing terrible about it and the skies will not begin to thunder. Ask yourself, "What do I think?" about any particular issue. "What is good for me in this case?" "What do I think about this person?" "What do I want to achieve for the rest of my life?" Learn that pride means inner joy and hope. Learn that you can create yourself in the image of your highest values. Learn that the most rational you is you at your best. Learn that pride is good. When you hear yourself think, make sure the words you say are self-affirming and self-authorizing. If you find yourself authorizing others and affirming others, ask yourself why you are ignoring yourself.
An interesting and positive result of this process will be that you’ll be able to make better decisions for yourself. Because you learn not to feel guilty for thinking about yourself and your life, you will gradually become better integrated around your self-interest. This points up the negative nature of collectivism; by discouraging you from thinking about yourself you have no point of reference in making everyday decisions. By learning to think about yourself, you can take back that vital need.
2. Confront the fear of the collective at the core. Look at the social aspects of collectivism and their emotional components. Look at the position of a person damaged by fear of the collective and how collectivism creates denial, humiliation, fear, confusion and a pretense that everything is all right. Confronting the fear of collectivism at one's psychological foundation means coming face to face, mentally with the demons and fears that collectivism creates in your mind.
Relate that fear to your core thinking processes and let them play out. Repressed emotions linger until faced. Once faced, the new knowledge helps you deal with fear so you can integrate it into your past and dispose of it.
3. Define the correct view of yourself rather than what other people and teachers have said about you. This correct view involves the recognition that there is no such thing as a collective, there are only individuals which means that you should accept the idea that “it is about you”; you are your own person separate and apart from all others. It involves putting other individuals in their place as beings equal beings, not better than you. They are people with equal rights but not superior rights.
This view also involves an expectation that others live up to the designation “rational animal," and that you hold them to that standard. It also involves that you understand that irrationality is the inhuman, the exception and the ridiculous. It involves establishing a relationship with yourse
lf wherein your ego is your primary focus not others, where thinking is chosen rather than conformity, where investigation is chosen rather than faith, where happiness is sought rather than conformity. It involves investigating your role in the world as a singular person who is responsible for yourself.
If you feel fearful about what other people think of you, recognize that this fear controls you; keeps you from living your full potential and manipulates you for the sake of others—not for your own sake. Feel that fear, understand it and connect it to the influence of collectivism. Then start creating your own self. Break the connection between collectivist expectations (altruism and self-sacrifice) and your personal needs. Make the draw of your personal needs stronger than those collectivist expectations. Never engage in rationalism which is the acceptance of an authority over your mind.
4. Never allow others to dictate your thinking, actions and what you do with your time. Let your schedule reflect your best interests; do not fill it with the best interests of others. Never sacrifice your time, thoughts and actions to others. Understand that Individualism does not condone or advocate a hatred of others. Not sacrificing to others means not sacrificing your mind, your values, your goals—it does not mean doing harm to others. It does not mean hatred of others. It means simply that others are not your primary focus, not your main concern when it comes to defining your values and goals.
Individualism Page 2