Photo in the paper today of North Koreans crying over the death of Kim Jong Il. While little news from the outside world gets into this isolated country, the people must realize that their political and economic lives leave something to be desired. So, why cry over someone who has repressed and impoverished them?

Your answer to that will give insights into your views about human nature and possibly about your politics. If you are a believer in the North Korea style of communism, which is more accurately a dictatorship, then you’ll take it at face value, deeply felt emotions about a great leader.

However, if you subscribe to the notion that the common people are being manipulated by those in power, either on the left in government or on the right in business, people who seem to have some superior ability to direct public thinking,  then you see a room full of victims of mind control. Naturally, since you recognize this, you are one of the few who are immune to mind control.  

If you feel that people are basically sheep and will irrationally follow any charismatic leader, then you are suspicious of the public and advocate for a system of strong laws that protect people from their own foolishness.

In fact, you may subscribe to some combination of the above, and these assessments of human nature may or may not all be somewhat true or somewhat false. However, you will likely respond to the human condition as you see it, not necessarily as it actually is.

The folks were friendly and would welcome you with their sweet smiles. Around the village, you could see mountains with green virgin forest – a jump-off point for treks. The villagers were religious people. They had a primary and elementary school where the kids used to love studying. They had a catholic church where there was mass every Sunday. They had a village hall for parties. They had a play ground for children. I really missed the village, a congenial place to live in and to enjoy.

Cover of Normal Life

To see Grandpa was Exciting and Memorable

It was summer, the classes were closed for the children to enjoy the summer. I turned eleven. During that summer, I had always used to visit grandpa’s place, which was 3 km away from our home. Grandpa was a widower. He had two sons. One was my father. My grandpa was 65 years old. He used to live in a hut, built of nipa woven leaves and scraped bamboo poles. It was surrounded by a bamboo fence. Surrounding his nipa hut was a vegetable plantation. At the back of his nipa hut was a big mango tree where he got used to sit with his old rocking chair that was made from narra tree. 

That morning to see grandpa was exciting and memorable. At his age of 65, nobody could tell he was that dirty old man. He was strong and still could lift up a 50kls of rice. He could be strong to rule over the villagers: they called him “captain”. Grandpa was a religious man. He always loved and used to preach the words of God in the village.

Sometimes in that summer, I had mingled with the villagers for my grandpa’s preaching. He had preached that man would always stand in his nature, in his heart and all his control especially in times of troubles. His preaching was well remembered by the villagers. It had taken us couple of hours for meditations and listening to his preaching before we left for home.

Uncle George had Grown Differently

Uncle George was a math’s professor in a private school in Tacloban, a neighboring province of Samar. He was 30 year old at that time, a bachelor and he also had managed a fast food chain business. Uncle George was 5’8” tall, dark skinned and handsome. When you saw him, you could tell he was really a man in nature for a woman to feel, to touch and to enjoy. But he was gay. I was thinking what would be part of the possibility for Uncle George to live according to my grandpa’s preaching. Some feminine feelings and desires drove him.

At fifteen, Uncle George had discovered that he had grown differently. He had thought and believed it was just a part of growing up. The changes that were taking place inside him were strangely confusing and desirable for a while. He had tried to live a normal life but he had fumbled helplessly. The more he tried to change, the more obvious became his femininity. At other times he had challenged the Lord, for creating him that way – a man living the life of a woman! It was maybe the reason why grandpa had abandoned him!

I would remember that summer, when I asked my grandpa about Uncle George. I could see his face blushed and his voice roared, telling me “Forgets your Uncle, to me he is dead!” I was terrified to hear what he had said to me! It had confused me about his attitude. He’s a religious man, who always loved and used to preach people the words of God but he had never loved his son!

Uncle George was a human. He has been created in God’s own image. Yeah. He was living differently among others. He would have hearts to love and understanding. Would you ignore this person because of his differences? Would you care for him?

Grandpa Died with Hate in his Heart

My grandpa had died in 1985. He was 79 years old and I had known he was a righteous man especially for the villagers. Yet, he had left me feeling confused about his preaching. He had missed the truth, that God had created man for his love, love that would nourish man’s heart and minds to appreciate all His creations. He had died with hate in his heart. His blessings and forgiveness for Uncle George had been closed and locked. But it had kept me remembering the way he was. I missed my grandpa.

Uncle George already retired. He is still a bachelor. He is happy with his life. He said, “Life is the most precious thing that God bestowed upon us. No matter what you are or who you are you have to appreciate it. Know your limitations and enjoy life as prescribed by heaven – that way you fulfill God’s objective.”

To read my previous article visit My Triond Views Versus My Wikinut Views

And if interested to share your awesome articles and other stuff join Triond, write and get paid.

My other articles are also available at

1. My Star Articles
2. My Article Photo Blog

 What makes them…?

Are criminals born or are they are the products of the environment? It has not been conclusively established that criminal tendencies are transmitted from parent to offspring. Much of the writing and research blame the environment. It is this awareness of the importance of the environmental factor that has led to advocacy of reform rather than retribution. We may safely say that the factors that make a man a criminal are sociological, economic, psychological and, in some cases political. In recent times, it has been reported that the steep rise in crime has been due to high levels of unemployment. Organized crimes have also been attributed to poverty. We have heard of maniacs who compulsively resort to murder.

Political radicalism forces persons to take up arms against the state and commit crimes to raise money or to eliminate enemies. There are political activists and terrorists who use violence for the realization of their political goals. Human nature has to be properly nurtured so that it imbibes values and enables individuals to live at peace with himself and his fellowmen. There is today the desire to amass wealth even though it requires individuals to ignore values and principles.  The pursuits of wealth tend to distort personality and make us less human. The baseness of man asserts itself and it leads him to crime. The desire for money makes us corrupt and to a corrupt individual crime comes naturally. Society has to guard itself against the erosion of values so that individuals are not led astray.  Society cannot exonerate itself or blame if criminals exists.

That human nature is the same everywhere has been said constantly but the Earl of Chesterfield added that the “modes are only different” meaning that in the case of corruption or the lack of the application of justice the lack is the same everywhere, perhaps one state may be corrupt than the next but the end is the same. The way it is applied can also be seen as different. For example the street cop will stop you crossing on a red light like never before, not because it is an infraction of the law but because the city need money. It would be nice to know this up front but such is not the case and in Italy the policeman may also appear once in a blue moon to slap a penalty on you for not having paid him protection money to keep your store open. These are different forms of corruption because one should not have to pay for walking across an intersection that is empty when shootings are never resolved as when you are targeted to keep your store “protected”. Upon further analysis regarding positive issues a mode of thanking someone is by shaking a hand in America whereas one may not necessarily do that in another country.

Human have an inherent will to take things for granted when they apply for unemployment benefits thinking that they will have free recourse to funds when today it is often better just to work part-time in order to avoid all the paper work just to get a few weeks of respite. Relief is temporary anyways. This was Aldous Huxley’s point when he was quoted as referring to human nature as taking anything for granted anytime.

Kant who was a favorite philosopher at royal courts at a time when absolute leaders were looking for ways in which to assuage their populations and avoid discontent, was one to mention that nothing perfect can ever arise out of the imperfection of human existence. He used the metaphor of “crooked timber of humanity” never become straight and in that  one can see that clearly there would have been no clean solution for royalty having to put with dissent over greater freedoms across Europe at that time.

Another more recent philospher Herbert Marcuse referred to human nature as he was writing his essay on liberation. Basically  he suggests that man become biologically attached to the items he creates through mass production and pop cultural spendings ; the items he uses on a regular basis become part of his every day need so to speak. Today we see this in many different forms,from man’s attachment to his cell phone that he has to carry with him at all times to doing his on-line shopping and bill paying over the internet.

Freud is difficult to understand. On my first reading of his thick discourse on Psychoanalytic Theory (about sex and sexuality ) I dismissed his views with a superior smile and condemned his work as plain whorehouse philosophy, his postulates the ravings of a wrong-headed man impelled to lift women’s skirts. But deeper study of his doctrine on human nature and further research humbled me. Who am I to refute a master with a well-entrenched reputation? So being a woman , I studied his teachings in relation to myself to understand him better. Besides, he was a model family man whose humble reaction to negative criticism was a calm reply: “I could only write to free my soul, to dispose of my effects.” Below I have attempted a simplified condensation of his “effects” along with my small analysis with hope that I can get your brief comment.

He was born Sigismund S. Freud (1856-1939). His medical career was enriched by training in chemistry, botany, and physiology; became chairman in neuropathology at the University of Vienna ; studied hypnosis in Paris in order to investigate the secrets of the human mind.

Let’s start with his basic postulates : the LIBIDO and HIS ‘HOLY TRINITY”– ID, EGO, AND SUPEREGO. From his own observations of his patients Freud concluded that SEX per se is the unconscious but prime factor of neurosis, the result of the workings of the mind. Upon this postulate he built the doctrine of human nature.

To Freud, sexual urge is represented by a force called the Eros (pleasure or joy) or libido. The id (the unconscious mind or “the shadow”) which constitutes our impulses and instincts is largely sexual. So, impliedly, a person’s sexual activity is figuratively “blind” or shadowed , a “disguised and distorted” act which bears a sexual meaning, a strange behavior traceable to the libido and the id. All this comes together as human nature. But human nature is disciplined by what he calls the ego ( conscience) and superego (the psychic censor for human impulses and instinct). We come to understand that the ego (conscience) and superego are the checkers of man’s animal instinct . Therefore, without his ego and superego a person is just a brute or wild beast. This triumvirate-the id, ego, and superego-are all present in the human mind or the brain and ruled by Eros or the libido (sexual urge). Thus, sex is largely in the mind. By extension we may be allowed to say that If the mind sexually runs amuck or is straying (like having incestuous relationship) there are two disciplinarians to form a blockade: the ego (conscience) and the superego (the psychic censor of impulses and instincts) . If the sexual drive is gone, life seems hollow because something vital to your body and mind is lost.

Does this make sense? Wait. Freud does not stop here. Here’s his favorite postulate:

An infant, he says, is biologically equipped with an original “psyche” which is a “pleasure-seeking, pain-avoiding constellation of conscious drives governed by the pleasure-seeking principle : the Eros or libido which dominates man until death resolves life. The libido is expressed in masturbation, penis or clitoris comparison, and erotic fancy.”

To Freud long objects like chalk, the cane, flagpole, candy stick, and so forth are phallic symbols. Even the thirst for knowledge, he says, is inseparable from sexual curiosity. To him the infant is impelled to suck not only to satisfy hunger or to get nutrition but also to gratify the erotic or pleasurable sexual urge. This, he says, is “continued as thumb-sucking , and this act goes on through adult life as AMOROUS KISSING”. The child , he postulates, from the age of three or four years starts to nurture “a desire for sexual information , two of which are the ideas of birth and parental intercourse”.

Now for Freud’s “masterpiece”–the OEDIPUS COMPLEX and FEAR OF CASTRATION COMPLEX:

Freud says that the Oedipus complex and fear of castration complex are universal, but they are not inborn. They are the “inevitable products of the individual’s conflict with the environment”. In the boy the Oedipus complex comes first as the child’s “incestuous love” for his mother (a “repressed sexual attraction “) accompanied by “hostility” towards his father. The id (unconscious mind) of the father is somehow vaguely aware of his son being a potential rival for wife’s love, and the son becomes “fearful” that his father, in order to protect his sexual prerogative, would deprive his son of his penis. That fear is the “fear of castration”. The Oedipus complex operates in reverse order in the girl. She feels “precastrated” by her mother, the reason why she develops “antagonism” towards her and a corresponding “attraction” towards her father. Thus she becomes unconsciously a “rival” of her mother for her father’s affection. Freud says, this situation is somehow known to the ego ( conscience) but the superego (the psychic censor of human impulses and instincts) checks this unconscious attraction . But it happens that the ego is sincere. Freud says, the conflict is just “submerged and never resolved”.

Freud has been met with violent oppositions, his work condemned by some quarters as “absolute nonsense”. He has been bitterly -criticized as being dangerous, a barbarian, a savage, a tyrant, a witchcraft genius, “the chief villain starting all the confusion about sex”, “revolting to the decent mind”, false, libelous, one-sided….one who should be “ousted ruthlessly with an iron broom” (Ernest Jones, The Life and Works of Sigmund Freud, 1995), but despite all the rot and malice labeled against him, his name has stayed, given in fact a protective layer by history. Being a woman, a concrete specimen of Freud’s teachings, I BASICALLY AGREE WITH FREUD. HOW ABOUT YOU? ###

The people involved for this venture were not just an ordinary people. They were all professionals: an Accountant, and a Solicitor, they are both from South Africa, based on their mailing addresses that I received. These people were all smart, clever and well-trained. They punched me with their pretty sweet approaches.

June 5, 2002 - I arrived in the office at six-thirty AM. The first thing I did was to check my email box. I was expecting emails from my children but a confidential letter from a certain person (an accountant), not one of my contacts, attracted my attention. I opened it with curiosity believing that it was really important. His letter contained many interesting things and promises. He wanted all my bank account information and identification numbers. After reading it, my imagination began to work.

Many Beautiful Dreams - Seriously, in the night at home, I started to dream many beautiful dreams for myself and for the bright future of my family that I had left in Philippines. I started drawing out many plans for the funds once I got hold of them, such as, to build a beautiful house for my family, to start business with my family, to send my children to good schools, to engage on real state, to buy my own expensive car, to travel around the world with my family, to buy gold and jewelry and other expensive imported goods. So, I didn’t wait for too long and decided to accept his proposal. I did reply by sending all the necessary details to him electronically.

June 8, 2002 - I sent to him my passport number. Also that same day, I received mails from the solicitor, who was assigned by my business partner in South Africa as my Legal Business Representative to execute all the affidavits for the said transaction. That same day I also received another mail from my legal representative explaining to me the status of the transaction and the amount (US$ 15,521.18) that I needed to pay for the Anti-Drug agency.

June 10, 2002 - My business partner in South Africa has called me up on the phone. He tried to convince me to send the money to our LAWYER, as the Anti-Drug agency needed them and it should be made cash at the counter. He added further to forget our misunderstanding but I was firm with my decision, not to give any money though I had promised to him that I would share in all expenses incurred for the said transaction once the funds are transferred to my new designated bank. Our conversation ended up with shouts at each other.

Not Yet Too Late to Realize - That was the only time I realized that I was hoaxed into believing that I would become a millionaire just for a short time by entering into a business transaction with the people whom I believed would help me change my life. Now I learned from my mistakes, and promised to myself never again to entertain any unsolicited letters coming into my mailbox.

To read my previous articles visit the following links:

Twenty-three Rubbish Articles That Generate Views and Earnings

Facebook and Triond Could Become One

The Superstar for Standing Ovations: Charice Pempengco

Ramadan Reminds Me About a Tragedy

Reasons Why I Should Not Leave Triond

And for those who want to share their awesome articles and other stuff, do not think twice Hit Triond, Write and Get Paid. My Other articles are also available at My Article Photo Blog 

Political parties, social workers, NGOs and people as a whole are divided, too. It appears that the manner in which the issue is being handled by the Government, it is unlikely that the Lokpal Bill would be a reality in near future despite big claims. Government is not the only party to be blamed, rigidity on the part of Anna’s team is also bears equal blame. Political parties are divided to a greater extent and even if the draft for the bill becomes ready in near future and that it is tablled on the floor of the Parliament, it is unlikely to get unanimous or constitutionally required support at that time. Actually, majority of the politicians are unwillingly supporting the Anna’s movement. They know that it is going to be very tough to pass it in the Parliament.

A big question is: What if the Lokpal himself/herself is charged for corruption? It is practically impossible to wipe out corruption until each person as an individual vows to live a moral life. But, in today’s time the life has become so complex that it appears impossible to live a cent percent pure and moral life. Lokpal or no Lokpal, the human nature cannot be changed overnite. WE ARE BORN TO BE CORRUPT AND WE ARE PROUD OF BEING CORRUPT. And, therefore I feel that Lokpal will remain a dream for near future and even if such practices are made reality, existence of corruption will be a parallel reality until each human being starts living honestly.

Man has a conscience. The conscience is a vital part of his human nature because it decides which action is good or evil and then aids him to make an appropriate decision. So by human nature, man leans towards the good and keeps away from the evil to avoid the prick of his conscience. How can one verify the existence of a human conscience? It is evident when man is compared to animals and the similarities and differences are seen. Animals are guided by their instinct for their basic necessities such as food, reproduction and protection. While man shares the need of some of these necessities, he has a conscience that enables him to decide the abstract qualities of life. An example that differentiates between an instinct and a conscience can be seen in the necessity for food. A bear needs to food to survive and so does a human, but unlike a bear that devours alone, a human being can consider a fellow human being who does not have food and share it. The instinct stops at the want, but the conscience contains the ability to display kindness to share.

Thus, the evidence of a general human nature is shown by the fact that individuals in all societies have consciences to form strong and binding morals and ethics that are extremely similar. Thus, because men in all societies rely on their consciences for many decisions every day, it can be said that there is human nature. For example, the commandment “Thou shall not kill” is obeyed in all societies as an integral part of the moral code. The uniformity among the societies of the world in keeping this commandment despite their cultural difference indicates that the conscience requires a man to stay away from murder. Thus, it is human nature not to murder (even though many do, and in doing so they breach their consciences). Now Sartre says “there is no human nature” (15). But Sartre is wrong when he concludes that there is no human nature because the uniformity of the human conscience and the existence of various ethical codes to keep it blameless throughout the world is the hallmark of human nature. Now the consciences cannot be developed depending on the environment of a man.  The uniformity of human consciences worldwide, support the fact that the conscience is a whole entity created in man by God. If it were something to be developed, then all would have relative consciences and no similarity would be seen in ethical codes set up worldwide by people from diverse cultures.  Therefore, Sartre’s conclusion about man being nothing at first (15) is false. Man is already in possession of a whole conscience that makes up a vital part if his human nature. Thus I believe that Sartre’s conceptions about human existence and its development in to something is false. The fundamental aspect of a man is his human nature and a significant part of that is his conscience. Since Sartre tries to deny the existence of a human nature, his existentialist philosophy does not lead to any ethical considerations.

Man is mortal. He is not eternal or omniscient to support his beliefs as definite standards that must be followed. Man can only think from his own box, in which he has been placed. The evidence that shows that man is in a box of his own situation is differing views and opinions about an issue at random. The differing perspectives show that each man thinks for himself based upon background, culture, education and physical qualities such as race, sex etc. These are the factors that limit man’s omniscience to make decisions for another man. Man’s finiteness leads to options suited for his own good whether knowingly or unknowingly. One man’s situation and perspective cannot be transposed onto another man’s life. Just like each human being is different in physical appearance from another, so is it with human situations. According to Sartre, “they envisage a number of possibilities and when they choose one, they realize that it has value only because it is chosen” (21). Since Sartre says that an option is a value only because it is chosen, he is implying that the pathway chosen by a man is good or bad only in his eyesight because he is the one making the choice. Now because each man can only take his own interest at heart, a moral good for all mankind cannot be established. Since man cannot decide for each other, Sartre’s idea of anguish is false because man cannot decide circumstances for the whole world.  This is so because each man chooses to suit to his purposes and tries to justify himself in his own eyes. But what is good for one man might not be the same. When everyone has their own good and bad, depending on their situation, there is no common moral code established for mankind. Thus Sartre’s existentialist philosophy does not lead to any common and solid ethical considerations because everyone is free to do what he sees is right in his own eyes without a common moral plane. Since everything is in the eye of the beholder, there is no firm ethical foundation for all mankind to stand upon. 

I believe forlornness does not lead to establishment of any moral obligation. As previously established, since man has a conscience, it determines what he can do and what he should not do. But the conscience is not alone in guiding a man in his daily walk. The conscience is aided by the moral values set up God as the sovereign creator.  It was already established above that conscience cannot be developed but is created as a whole entity and joined into man by God. This relationship between the established moral code and the created conscience is that, the conscience recognizes the moral value God has ordained, and uses it. An analogy can be drawn for this relationship for it to be better understood. The conscience is a guide and the moral code is a set of directions that it must follow. Without the moral code the conscience cannot guide and without the conscience the moral law is not helpful to man.  Based on the permissibility and prick of the conscience, the universal moral code is followed and man stands firm on it. When Sartre takes God out of the picture, the moral plane God constructed for man to stand firm on disappears and the lack of a conscience produces a vacuum. Thus man is forlorn because he cannot fill his own vacuum because he did not create himself.  Thus forlornness is the result of taking away an established moral code and opening an unrecognized vacuum. It is unrecognized because man does not know what to do in the space, in other words, he is forlorn. Thus, Sartre’s existentialism does not lead to any ethical considerations, rather, it takes away the established moral code that the conscience recognizes and produces a vacuum, thereby making man forlorn.

Just like forlornness, I believe despair is the result of doing away with the belief in God and his establishment of the moral code and human nature. The absence of the human nature and the moral code brings about confusion in a man’s being about the ethics of a situation. But God did not give man the conscience and the moral code alone to make choices; he also gave man a mind to reason. The conscience is a guide along with the mind to help man select a morally appropriate yet profitable possibility. The blending of the conscience aided with the moral law and the human reason helps man arrive at many sound decisions regarding an issue. But the use of a single plane such as the reasoning without the conscience can lead to the dilemma Sartre mentions;  the student who had trouble whether to go to war or stay with his mother. The student was despairing because he only used his reasoning plane, which is evident because he does not give much attention to his mother’s love. He would not have despaired to pick an option if his conscience had an upper hand above his reason.

As mentioned before, conscience is part of the human nature endowed by God. His moral code gives direction to the conscience so that when used with reason, there will be no need to despair about which option to pick. If that student believed in God and opened the Bible, he would have found out that vengeance is prohibited and love encouraged. He would have known that the right decision in this case was to stay with his mother.  His conscience would have directed him to stay with his mother because the moral law says “Honor your father and your mother” (166) and “lf someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also” (1963). In his case, conscience would have directed him to show love towards his mother and refrain from retaliation on the enemy army. On the other hand, vengeance for his brother’s life lead to killing men for the wrong cause, for his satisfaction, not national defense. By going off to war two purposes would have been served, his vengeance and national defense. But based on the moral law, his conscience would have accused him of a wrong motive since what first prompted him to go off to war was not national concern, but revenge. It would have also accused him of not loving his mother as he ought to. Sartre himself says that the student’s mother needed him badly, since he was her only hope and comfort. His conscience would have pointed out to his loving relationship with his mother based on upon the commandment given in God’s moral law. Here his conscience would have the upper hand because it would have guided him to make the right decision. But in this case his reason could have only guided him to see who needed him more – France or his mother-blinding him to what the conscience and the moral law regards and disregards highly, love and vengeance respectively. Since the student used only his reason and kept aside his conscience and the moral law, he was despairing because his reason put his mother and France at equal value, while they were not. His reason could not determine the value of love and vengeance and the direction to be taken; only his conscience could. The suppression of the conscience led him to despair about which option he should pick.  Therefore, I believe despair in Sartre’s existentialist philosophy is the result of discarding God and his moral law and bereaving the conscience of any direction, and trusting the reasoning faculty alone.

So thus, one can see that neither Sartre’s conception of human existence, or anguish, forlornness and despair do not lead to the establishment of a solid ethical plane. Sartre does not agree with the existence of human nature because of his lack of belief in God. Sartre’s existentialist philosophy does not regard the conscience and the already established moral law as elements of the human nature. By rejecting human nature, Sartre reduces man to another biological existence, which is clearly not the case.  The conscience, moral law and reason are unique to man, and they compose his human nature. Once man’s human nature is denied, there are no ethical considerations that can come out from any other source. Thus his existentialist philosophy cannot lead to any moral good.

Works cited

Sartre,  Jean-Paul.   Existentialism and Human Emotions.  Trans.  Bernard Frechtman.  New York, NY:  Kensington Publishing Corp,  1985. 

The New International Version.  Bruce B. Barton, gen.  ed.  Grand Rapids, Michigan:  Zondervan ,  2008.

Green dot is a mere bug born out of this centrally planned virus. Copping with the effects of the last 4 years since that fateful fall of America’s biggest, banks, insurance firms, and banking investment firms we belly up in the face of a gigantic mortgage bubble, a sell off in derivatives, and followed by the myriad of defaults on credit-default swaps. The infection of a privatized banking system has made people savings, their hard earned work hours, financial independence, a venue for insane stratosphere of profit and compensation. They(banking system) represent the pillar of the new American century as well as building up the ordinary mans dreams from start to finish. They say sovereignty of an individual is breached firstly when a mans god is questioned, but I can tell ya this for sure, for America, its become the man’s an woman’s financial s. For it buys them freedom from the chains of regulations, laws, codes, fines, of this once great and beautiful nation of ours that has been made into a counter-top with a cash register sitting on it. I see no point in fighting a force as powerful as gravity itself. For if you are a dissident with strict selfless intentions, you know women and gentlemen, this man is a man going places in achieving human philosophy as well as human engineering. And these successful individuals who’s own vain-less pursuits of glory end up not only benefiting themselves, but the entire world as we know it. Because the only force big enough to garner the technology of the idea is not one man’s mad insane quest for glory, but all of societies efforts to recognize as a standard idea, product, or sometimes a modern cliché. The free market in a sort funny way act’s like this, cause the free market does not represent the Dow Jones, Americas GDP, the Federal Reserve, it is the collective effort of the people in conducting unregulated productive exchanges to continue the engines of society running. I challenge any man or woman to research the minimum capital requirements to what kind of, premiums, information, time, liability coverage, and just risk there is for a middle class American to obligate his time to a stock, bond, mutual fund, ETF, or currency. Financial freedom of choice are frowned upon words when an American says it, cause he has something rather to hide perhaps? Oh, this is just an example of how suspicion constitutes as crime until proven guilty at a latter date. Cohesion of human nature in this case is the eugenics officer(the government)and society will be a better place if we not only, tax, dictate policy, and prohibit CEO’s compensation in the name and common good of the American people. The government is not only going to change that Ceo’s compensation, but workers rights in a bid to pass bigger hikes on federal capital gains, a hike on the corporate tax(currently the highest in the world), and all that there is going to be left in the end is the never ending apparatus of government agencies to join a work at the rest of your life. Welcome to your life, your country, your state, but its your mind that can change this by a mere refusal. In the words of the famous Irish revolutionary Michael Collins, “they may draft us, beat us, tax us, but we have weapon more deadlier than all in the entire British imperial arsenal, and that is our refusal.

Simple ideas sell well because people are simple creatures in general. Out of all of the humans, the majority of them claim that they are insulted by low brow, childish, foolish ideas. Yet, a good majority of this majority are among the people to rush out to get their trusty mits on the latest gadgets. I-phones, E-Readers, Computers of all flavors and operating system. They are popular because they are new. If technology is only a few months out of date, they are scorned by the mass public. Yet all these upgrades are is maybe a few bells and whistles, some bugs ironed out, and perhaps a new shiny paint job. It is all about the hype. Someone can believe that the world is being changed, if given the proper hype job.

Consider one of the most elementary pieces of technology out there, the television remote control. Whoever thought of that, should be given a pat on the back and commended out there, as people are rather lazy and they have exploited that fact, so they do not have to get up off of the couch. Now only if there would only be a remote control to cause food and drinks to teleport right in front of you already made and also one to transport the waste from your body and flush it, so you don’t have to get up and use the toilet, then there would be no need to get up from your couch ever again when watching your favorite television programs.

Too good to carry an actual book, and want it more compact. E-readers of all flavors are on the market and ready to download digital books, in a more convenient manner. Granted, they’re not that much smaller than your average paper back some of them, but it is the thought that in fact counts. Consolidation of several features into one device, have made it. Who is to care if you have working devices that do the exact same thing that you just bought six months ago. This is new.

Inventions throughout time have most likely been based upon one isolated thought, people wondering if something was possible. Who knows. Maybe the next stupid idea that you have, about an update on an old idea, could be fruitful. You just never know. Someone had to think of the Yo-Yo after all. Someone had to think of a deck of cards. Someone had to think of paper, of pens, and of various tools. Your next thought could be one that could be profitable no matter how stupid it might be.

If you try and think too far past a certain level, if you think too high brow, then chances are you’re going to sink quicker than you can imagine.

Other Recent Articles:

Top Ten Pricing Games on the Price is Right

Only a Fool Would Try and Cheat the Google

The Ten Eras of Life

Ten Amazing Board Games

Difference Between Scattered and Isolated Thunderstorms.

And More at the Blog of Insanity.