Thought Patterns

I happened to visit the Brickbottom Open Studios annual event in Somerville, MA recently (Sunday 11/24) and I dropped by the studio of a brilliant artist, Josh Wisdumb Spivack. I wasn't there for too long, but his work is stunning...almost, seemingly a living representation of mental states on paper or other medium. And then I picked up this postcard that he left on a table as a gift to visitors and on which is printed these words:

"Visualize yourself in a sphere of intricate thought constantly creating something out of nothing. Everything is connected through the rhythm of creativity. Think to the point where visual thoughts became the art. Drawing, painting, and sculpting reflect life as inspiration. When I put pen to paper or brush to canvas ideas explode...balancing my existence, connecting the motion of ideas." -- Josh Wisdumb Spivack 

"Everything is connected through the rhythm of creativity. Think to the point where visual thoughts became the art." Isn't this the code of all creativity? I think that this is why art is so inspirational, because it somehow codifies the secrets of escapement from the limitations of "normal" consciousness. We are stuck in our "reality" replete with limitations that seem intractable; reality seems immovable with people, opinions, circumstances of having and having not when suddenly, from nowhere a solution or a novel perspective emerges. I always find the experience amazing when a problem I am wrestling with suddenly vanishes with the flash of an idea. In fact, it happened to me only a couple of hours ago, struggling to find a solution and then, suddenly, with a gentle shift of focus, all was well, and reality—at least for now, seems to be my friend.

I related to Spivack's words, I think, because of the never-ending need for inspiration to escape the mundanity—or worse, that can stifle or plague human existence. And I refer to the mundanity of both our individual and collective existence. We become locked into our existing habits, beliefs, institutions and paradigms in a sort of intellectual paralysis that tells us or lies to us that this is the way that it is and it will never change. But we have just witnessed the accolades for Nelson Mandela in the wake of his death; he would not accept the atrocity of apartheid and against all odds he and his people prevailed. Tired old explanations can at times have nothing more going on other than that they are old and that their constant repetition tires the mind to accept what need not be accepted.

The artists' mentality is a virtue that some philosophers have recognized, Nietzsche most clearly comes to mind. However, there are other streams of philosophical thought that would discount art because art is, after all, only art! But the truth is that the best philosophy is also art, and that the greatest value of both art and philosophy may be that of inventing or discovering new perspectives. "Thoughts become art." But it also follows that on a sublime plane art is thought.

You can visit Josh Wisdumb Spivack's website at http://www.visualthoughtpattern.com/

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

Single-payer!

The typical American knee-jerk condemnation of single-payer systems for the delivery of healthcare care, i.e. the socialization of healthcare is a crystal clear example of knee-jerk, i.e. non-thinking. The knee-jerk response is likely in many cases to reflect the type of "thinking" that loves to proclaim that the American healthcare system is "the best in the world." And repeating "America is s the best country in the world" ad nauseam is a mantra the origins of which I am quite curious. I don't believe that the slogan was commonplace in the 1950s although I am not sure. I suspect the origins of the braggartism may have been a collateral outgrowth of the Vietnam War and other follies in which some Americans have felt forced to justify the needless sacrifice of human life—while other Western democracies stand aside relatively unscathed. Thus, of course, the cost of American blood was worth it because, after all, "America is the greatest country in the world!"

Don't get me wrong, I love America too. But arguing that all things American are better than that had by any other country is patent nonsense and unflattering jingoism. Acknowledging that China may have a competitive advantage in their space program because they don't have to deal with democratic resistance to policy does not constitute an endorsement of the Communistic dictatorship even if we acknowledge their edge. Regardless, hardly any American would trade his liberty in return for getting back to the moon first! Dear  Americans, self-proclaiming ourselves as the best in everything is arrogant and, thereby, self-diminishing. And America is far from being best when it comes to the delivery of affordable and effective healthcare. A key ingredient to greatness is an ability to deal with hard facts, and then use them to achieve a positive outcome.

Some parameters of the healthcare problem are nicely spelled out by Todd Hixon in "Why Are U.S. Health Care Costs So High?" in a 3/01/2012 Forbes.com article. Hixon reports that various, highly credible analyses conclude that the cost of American healthcare is about twice that of "peer countries" such as Japan and the U.K. One of the largest disparities is the dramatically higher earnings of medical specialists in the U.S (three to six times higher). And the use of specialists in the U.S. vis–à–vis primary care doctors is also much higher than in other countries.Yet, the outcome in quality when measured in terms of longevity is about the same. I decided to do some quick web surfing to see if this claim is supported and it quickly became apparent that, indeed, it is. A University of California, Santa Cruz website shows that, based on figures for the year 2000, despite its enormous lead in per capita healthcare spending the United States ranked 27th in the world in longevity. Cuba, which ranked 28th, spent $186 per capita while the U.S. spent $4,500 (no, this is not a misprint). [http://ucatlas.ucsc.edu/spend.php]  Consistent with this perspective, the online Wall Street Journal's Market Watch site reports that, "However counterintuitive, spending more on health care does not result in better health outcomes. Of [the] top 10 nations with the highest health expenditure per capita, only three are in the top 10 for life expectancy." [http://www.marketwatch.com/story/10-countries-that-spend-the-most-on-health-care-2013-07-30].

These trends indicate that the primary drive for higher prices is not the quality of healthcare but the desire for profit. Some self-examination by the American psyche reveals, fairly easily, that while many sectors of the economy operate on purely capitalistic principles of charging what the market can bear, the practice does not always hold up and is not justifiable in all areas of economic activity. This mentality is wrecking the American healthcare system and it is also wrecking its system of higher education. I would put the "justice" system in the same boat because the purchase of justice just ain't justice. There is no persuasive reason for why a single-payer system—the government, cannot efficiently administer the healthcare system. A culture that cultivates an ombudsman mentality and internal competition can succeed in areas of economic activity that have little use for profit. It is anathema to suggest that a surgeon might recommend surgery because of undue influence by the opportunity for profit. Take your head out of the sand! And Big Pharma brings to mind a caduceus with the dollar sign superimposed on it. But this is a subject for a future posting. 

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

Standing Up to Monsanto

The strength of a democracy may best be tested by successful challenges to vested power interests who affront basic rights with the arrogance of might makes right. The Farmer Assurance Provision (a.k.a.  "The Monsanto Protection Act") of 2013 and its recent revocation by means of allowed expiration is a case in point. The behavior of Monsanto, the multibillion dollar agribusiness has been, according to numerous reports, beyond the pale. The legislation allowed the USDA to over-rule court orders to stop the growing and sale of genetically modified crops (GMOs) until the process of legal challenges would finally run its course. Essentially it allowed the Monsanto Company, the primary developer of GMOs, to turn the world's populations into its guinea pigs even if courts were to find that enough evidence existed to halt production.

It is amazing that the legislation was allowed to be inserted into the bill last March, but it is also a source of democratic pride to see that, in the aftermath of a massive reaction by the public and the anti-GMO movement, the law was allowed to expire on September 30th. But the Monsanto Protection Act is only a recent example of incredible corporate bullying that should provoke corrective public action. I refer to the company's lawsuits against farmers for selling crops that have been contaminated with their Roundup resistant GMO crops. The compelling story of Percy Schmeiser is told in the "Monsanto vs Farmer," a blog post from "The Grand Disillusion." The blog quotes a letter sent by Monsanto to farmers who they believe are growing Monsanto's genetically modified grape seed: "We have reason to believe that you might be growing Monsanto’s GM rapeseed without a licence. We estimate that you have so many acres. In lieu of us not sending you to court send us $100 000 dollars or $200 000 dollars in two weeks time and we may or may not send you to court.” And the letter closes with a threat that if it were to be made public the farmer would be "fined." Behavior such as this, if correct, is warrant in and of itself and sufficient reason to dissolve and reorganize the company. I don't know what specific criminal laws are violated by this type terrorizing tactic, however, I am fairly confident that they are on the books. If not, then laws criminalizing such behavior should be enacted.

The other question that needs to be addressed is how it is possible that corporate monsters like Monsanto amass their political power. Clearly, a huge element of the problem is the overwhelming corruption of American politics that is due to the astronomic levels to which campaign financing has evolved, only increasing the unholy alliance between money and politics. If the legalized bribery, otherwise known as campaign contributions made by lobbyists, is eliminated we will go a long way to ending the privileged treatment that companies like Monsanto are accorded. And then, doing something about the revolving doors between industry and regulatory agencies—a problem in most countries—will contribute much towards restoring or, perhaps, creating a new level of social integrity. Political movements to require GMO labeling, despite or because of its defeat last year in the California referendum, are now spreading to many states. It's time to tame the monster.

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

Hyper-prescribing and Natural Alternatives

The ignoring or dismissal of natural alternatives to the use of prescription drugs or pharmaceuticals has little justification. And it is more than a little crazy. Let me use myself as a case in point. I remember, almost ten years ago, that my blood pressure had rather suddenly spiked to about 150/100. That's high but not extremely high, but I hadn't experienced a blood pressure issue until this time and I was naturally concerned. I went for an examination, in this case I was examined by a nurse practitioner, and it was recommended that I immediately go on high blood pressure medication. I decided to pass; I chose instead to monitor my sodium intake and also take various supplements such as olive leaf extract. It took some time, but gradually my blood pressure returned to normal levels. Now, about ten years later, my blood pressure is within normal range and I avoided, quite possibly, the taking of blood pressure medication for the rest of my life.
 
The rush to prescribe powerful prescribed pharmaceuticals has become commonplace. However, natural supplementation with extracts from herbal and nutritional sources have never been more effective. I think the pharmaceutical industry likely deserves some of the credit here because today the active compounds in natural extracts are far more accurately identified and measured than in the past. Taking herbs and other natural substances today has science behind it, and clinical studies too even if the DSHEA statute in the United States prohibits any claims on product labels concerning efficacy regarding their use in treating disease.

And then, of course, there is the ever-present issue of profit. Pharmaceutical companies cannot patent natural substances derived from foods or traditionally used herbs and as a result they have little or no motivation to perform the highly expensive clinical trials required by the FDA to certify their effectiveness as medicinals. And so, as a result, individual consumers can only experiment on their own; physicians are generally untrained in their usage and the prescription of ridiculously expensive pharmaceuticals, with their serious potential side-effects, are the norm. Some patients go to see alternative holistic practitioners but the mainstream, in general, won't go to them and most, anyway, are not covered by insurance.

Dietary and herbal extracts are not endorsed by the FDA and, therefore, they are not "proven" to be effective. Therefore, they are unproven and, thus, officially "unscientific" and not used in traditional protocols.

What is the net result of this charade? The obscenely high cost of prescribed pharmaceuticals are a significant factor in the soaring cost of healthcare and the current healthcare crisis, which is endemic of the cultural epidemic of hyper-profiteering in economic sectors that do not distinguish profits in, say, the computer or shoe industries from profits made, for example, from the delivery of healthcare and education. Clearly, pharmaceuticals have their role, but the point that I am making here is that nutritional or dietary supplements also have their place in treatment regimes, often as an initial therapy, but they are too often ignored because of inexperience and lack of knowledge pertaining to their usefulness, or disparaged with a knee-jerk and smug dismissal.

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com


(ref: EXFG4HJ39RYW)

On "Being Entitled' and "The Attitude of Entitlement"

Fellow motorists, don't you just love it when a pedestrian is crossing a street at a busy intersection, oh so slowly moseying along showing all-too-clearly that s/he has the right of way and—Heaven forbid! don't let the rush cause any uptick in the pace. I especially love it when the pedestrian is walking across the street with nose buried in his or her cell phone! And, hey, if there is an accident, of course, the driver is to blame! This little vignette is a picture of the attitude of entitlement!

Oh my, I can hear now the sanctimonious defenses! Of course, I'm not talking about an elderly or infirm pedestrian but c'mon! Unfortunately the slow pokes may also be automobile drivers and they may well feel as I do when they they're the ones in the car.  The truth is, it is a thoughtful gesture to pick up the pace in order to ease the traffic flow that is certainly possible when multiplied hundreds of times.

I am using this rather insignificant but very common annoyance because it clearly depicts the "I don't give a damn" state of mind that most of us are capable of assuming from time to time; it is the attitude of entitlement. And the attitude of entitlement, unfortunately, provides ample ammo for the enemies of entitlement, such as the Randians and the libertarians and all who claim that social entitlements are giveaways and the disempowering tools of the Nanny State. The abusers of social entitlements allow the other side of selfishness to proclaim that entitlement programs only nurture the selfish, gluttonous greed of those who choose to live off the system.

But the irony is all too clear. Those who assume the attitude of entitlement and demand more than what is fair or justly deserved are the true cousins of the uber selfish who would deny virtually all social services and benefits even when basic needs and corresponding entitlements have been fairly established. The uber selfish may indeed show the most audacity in their display of the attitude of entitlement. They are ungrateful for their wealth and their good fortune—even if justly earned, and do not appreciate the profound debt owed to all those whose sweat and struggle have made their financial good fortune possible. The uber selfish owe their attitude of entitlement to arrogance, which is blind to the reality of how much each and every human being owes to its fellowship with others.

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

The Crux of Social Empowerment

A philosophy that deeply understands the moral imperatives of fairness, beneficence and compassion must on some level accept the necessity of social entitlement. The question becomes, then, What constitutes an entitlement?

Basic needs would seem to encompass the notion of a social entitlement, but if we end the inquiry with that we will surely have begged the question by merely passing the onus from the term 'entitlement' to 'basic needs'. Indeed, the reason for this demonstrates, I think, that a social entitlement is in almost all usage synonymous with 'basic social needs'. What constitutes a basic social need, i.e. a service or a material need of which is the right of every member of society to be afforded.

Even libertarians recognize certain basic needs. Roads and public works including infrastructure for plumbing, if I am not mistaken, are accepted by most libertarian as necessary provisions that society must to some extent provide or at least facilitate. Also, I believe, they would allow for police and some military capability to be put in place to protect the public against domestic violence or foreign attack. However, where is the line drawn. In the previous blog post I argued that individuals who are members of a democratic political system are entitled to a system that maximizes opportunities for the electorate to choose between a diversity of candidates while also being a afforded an environment most conducive a discussion of the issues that could admirably inform electoral decision. In my view, a democracy free of the disruption and division that is the political party is an entitlement. I realize that this statement goes much further than many may want to go, but it serves as an example of trying to distinguish what is and what is not an entitlement.

I suggest that a social entitlement is a combination of a need or the provision of a service that should be afforded, based upon—as outlined in Ethical Empowerment: Virtue Beyond the Paradigms, principles of fairness, beneficence and compassion. However, this entails the empowerment of both individuals and society. The establishment of a functional and efficient system of roadways will benefit the welfare of both society as a whole as well as the welfare of individuals. This is obvious to most, however, I argue that the same argument supports an end to the needless division of political parties. And it applies to universal healthcare. And the injustice of a "justice" system that allows wealthy defendants the opportunity to purchase justice by buying the best legal defense but which is not available to all. It applies to equal opportunities to receive a quality education, and without the necessity of going broke in the process.

"The whole is greater than the sum of its parts," a maxim coined by G.E. Moore, may be clearly seen to support a notion of entitlement that goes beyond the myopic sort of view that only allows for the provision of basic needs in the most dire of situations (e.g. starvation), and entails a deep appreciation of the mutuality of self-regarding and other-regarding interests. And this is the crux of social empowerment.

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

Crash the Party!

Imagine a democracy without political parties!  Imagine the empowerment to both individual and society that would ensue if needless political division is eliminated, and real differences of opinion concerning institutional and public policy become the norm of a society, a nation and even of a world's free political expression.  Is an independent, non-party system desirable and/or feasible?

The inherent dangers of the political party were forewarned by George Washington (in his Farewell Address) and by James Madison (in Federalist No. 10).  In our era the prescience of these men is being borne out. Moisei Ostrogorski proposed the de-institutionalization of the political party in 1902, and in the current day "nonpartisan blanket primaries" that put Democratic, Republican and all other candidates on a single primary ballot without stated party affiliation (often entailing a runoff election between the top two finishers) are gaining ground in California and other states.

Consider the recent shutdown of the federal government that was spurred by Republican opposition to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"). Would a hypothetical non-party democracy have reacted differently?  I believe it would have!  Consider the nature of political coalescence or the coming together of diverse interests. It has been argued that political parties act as a safeguard against despotism and dictatorship, however, it is worthwhile noting that Stalin and Hitler rode to power on the backs of their respective parties.  On the contrary, is it not reasonable to imagine that without the pressures to align with political parties politicians and individuals alike would more easily and freely resist the efforts by political leaders to impose unwanted policies?  With the free flowing of opinion unimpeded by divisive political parties, policies could be thoughtfully considered by individual reflection while at the same time the natural coalescence of opinion could interfere with ill-advised implementations before they take root by means of the artificial mobilization of opinion marshaled by party apparatus and knee-jerk political allegiances.

The independent, non-party system that I recommend in my book would require and depend upon the formation of a broad spectrum public financing of elections. One of the keys to the existence of institutionalized political parties is the dependency of candidates on parties for fundraising. Public financing is in some respects a separate issue, however, as with political parties, unequal private financing disharmonically skews and imbalances the free flowing of political opinion.  Legitimate entitlements are routinely rejected by Libertarians, followers of Ayn Rand (and others) at the expense of true flourishing and individual freedom.  And there is little doubt that the entitlement to democratic elections unimpeded by divisive party influences would also be rejected by them, especially if public financing in involved. But entitlements will be the topic of the next edition of this series.

This blog post is also the script for this video/podcast:



ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

On the Basis of Morality

On the Basis of Morality is the title of  a work by Arthur Schopenhauer. Schopenhauer viewed compassion as, virtually, the singular factor that determines ethical reasoning. If you are guided by compassion then, you are most likely on solid ethical ground. While I certainly acknowledge the enormous importance of compassion and the critical role it plays in morality and in the living of an ethical life, I argue in Ethical Empowerment that it is only one component of morality and cannot by itself comprise a coherent ethics. From this perspective, I see much to admire in both socialism and libertarianism. Self-interest and altruism are both highly charged ingredients of ethical life. Selfishness, however--Ayn Rand aside--is intrinsically amoral and a precursor of unethical reasoning. And pure altruism also, I believe, can at times produce unethical results. I welcome your participation in this discussion!

While there is more to morality than the ethical expressions of compassion, it seems impossible that morality could exist without any emotion. That's what the Stoics tried to do but, in the end, they were victims of a grand self-deception. Morality without emotion would be like life absent any sensation. Without motive force there can be only pure chaos or pure inaction. The great problem of ethics is not, as the Stoics believed, the extirpation of emotion but, rather, the quest of its fine tuning and harmony in concert with the rational mind. (I refer to my book, Ethical Empowerment: Virtue Beyond the Paradigms.)




ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

Philosophy, Hypnosis and Wittgenstein

There are many interconnections between philosophy and hypnosis. Even the use of words is in itself hypnotic. Wittgenstein's understanding of the morphing of a word's meaning from one context to another is extraordinarily hypnotic. How many arguments and vitriol have been fomented by the use of words that are understood differently by the parties concerned? And the controversy deepens because words far too often substitute for meaning. Yes, we require words to communicate meaning but, as Wittgenstein's ladder suggests and, I believe, Plato understood as well, ultimately particular language fades as meaning, understanding, knowledge and wisdom emerges. Many deep and ideological confusions are forms of mass hypnosis founded on disconnected abstractions("forms of life"). (originally posted 6/29/13)

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

The Snowden Affair

I admit I haven't been studying the details of the current Edward Snowden affair. It seems as though the entire nation is forming a posse to drag this guy in. But it also seems to me that the issue of massive surveillance of telephone conversations and, etc. is something that may be as threatening in the long run or even more threatening that terrorism. The entire herd wants Snowden taken in a tried as a traitor. Honestly, I am not familiar enough with the details to form a strong opinion, at this point, one way or the other. But I am a bit surprised that a herd reaction rising up against the specter of something reminiscent of Orwell's 1984 has not been stronger and more strident. Regardless of the culpability of Mr. Snowden, the everyday hypnotism that is expressed in the acceptance of growing surveillance is disconcerting. Having said that, however, I don't understand the concerns of some people regarding the mounting of cameras at traffic intersection or on street corners that monitor public activity. That type of surveillance is not intrusive and clearly can and has prevented and/or solved serious crime. (originally posted 6/25/13)

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

Everyday Hypnotisms

We are constantly being hypnotized by the occurrences and events in our lives. Combine deep or continuing focus with repetition and continual reinforcement and we have what might be called the everyday hypnotisms of life itself. As a practicing hypnotherapist, I have clients who come in to see me with all sorts of bad habits that may be described in both behavioral or mental terms. However, this blog is not about stopping smoking or nailbiting, or improving motivation or self-esteem, etc. Here we engage the hypnotic-like phenomena that characterize much of social, cultural and political life.

So let's begin with a short list of some everyday hypnotisms.

• Political parties. It is with much satisfaction that I observe growing frustration with the institution of political parties. I have advocated an independent, non-party political systems since 1970, and now California and a few other states have passed laws that implement non-partisan qualifying primaries in which the top two finishers are selected, with the election then decided by runoff. This is similar to a tradition in some U.S. city governments and elsewhere. A no-party politics has the potential to empower politics and the citizenry, esp. if it is combined with meaningful public campaign financing.

• The U.S. government is spending over $1billion dollars in interest payments every day! The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund loans money to poor countries that can never pay back their loans and, as a result further cripples their economies. And personal dept is allowed to exponentially increase. Is there something wrong with banks that earn UNLIMITED profit when debtors run into difficulties that are compounded by the never-ending spiral of compound interest?

• One word: Ideology. Okay, two words: ideology and dogma. Are these not everyday hypnotisms that pervade human existence? 

The above are three huge examples of everyday hypnotisms that are adored by the masses (excepting, perhaps, the astronomic compounding of interest!) Respond to the above, or add your own examples of everyday hypnotisms. (originally posted 4/14/13)

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

UFO Sightings and the Courtroom

The UFO phenomena is a favorite issue for skeptics to kick around. Despite the widespread view of many that there is something to it, the mechanisms of the conventional wisdom produces a psychological license to joke about it so that anyone who seriously discusses it in "polite" conventional society is dismissed as a kook or a crackpot and becomes fodder for derisive humor. What is really funny is that that the "non-scientific" thinking that goes into courtroom deliberations over guilt or innocence often utilizes the same level of circumstantial and secondhand observation that produces a rational basis for believing that many UFOs are more than swamp gas or meteors or some other random, natural event. Oh well, I guess we'll just have to start making jokes about the justice system and its so-called carefully deliberated verdicts. Ha! Ha! Hysterical.

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com

Is 'Pseudoscience' a Fair Tag?

Is the "pseudoscience" tag always a fair dismissal? I am not a scientist, and I will not pretend to be one on this blog. However, the nature of what constitutes fair play and objective inquiry is at least as much a matter of philosophic inquiry as it is of scientific inquiry. And when inordinate efforts are made--sometimes violent--to suppress purported discoveries or inventions from ever seeing the light of day the scientist has a duty to don the uniform of an ethicist or, at least, of serious ethical agency.

Thomas Kuhn and Michael Polanyi have written about the phenomena of what Kuhn calls scientific paradigms and both acknowledge that the work of everyday science may be characterized as an organized effort to confirm existing paradigms. Very slowly, paradigms may eventually shift and a new understanding emerges...only to form a new paradigm. In this blog, I will discuss some instances in which challenges to the prevailing orthodoxy are resisted along the lines of what Kuhn and Polanyi described, which is that of institutional enforcement or stigma that  frustrates any would-be paradigm smasher. However, a plethora of stories concerning unconventional inventions have been reportedly suppressed with heavy-handed tactics. I am referring to claims that "can't be validated" because "they can't be true" because apparently their validation would overthrow laws of physics or other paradigms.

Perhaps the most extreme, documented victim of suppression was the burning of  Wilhelm Reich's books and destruction of some of his equipment in 1956 that related to his orgone accumulators. I don't know whether or not anything in Reich's writing or his equipment  have merit, however, the conduct of the FDA in orchestrating this thuggery is terribly disconcerting. I will also mention the name of T. Henry Moray whose invention seemed to pull energy out of thin air and was witnessed by many including the much acclaimed physicist, Harvey Fletcher. 

I will go into more detail about Moray's claim and many others during the life of this blog, but in the meantime please enter replies pro or con, for or against respective to what I have said thus far. Alternative science, suppressed inventions and the possible merits of some "pseudoscience" are some of the topics that are discussed in my book, Ethical Empowerment: Virtue Beyond the Paradigms.

ArthurDSchwartz.com                                                                                            IntegralHypnosis.com