From last time:
In 1957 with the first publication of Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand said she was going to stop the mystic, collectivist, altruistic, machine--that is, the anti-autonomous man machine--then running the world. She said she'd do this by filling up the world with people who were so selfish--so individually selfish, so Objectivismly selfish--that they would not tolerate the likes of those who preached people didn't have any kind of needs of consciousness, let alone no fundamental, basic need of consciousness such as the need for freedom.
If freedom isn't a legitimate human need why do we value it so deeply?
Are we born valuing it or as we develop and grow older do we learn the reasons why we should (hence, do) value it?
The answer to this depends on how we interpret ...
Along with the irrefutable fact of the [Five Billion Dollar] Government Grant to Behaviorist sympathizers it appears quite possible that three other things are just as true. One, George Orwell will end up being off by no more than 100 years in his prediction made in the 1940's that "1984" would be the year totalitarianism takes over America. Two: if Objectivism and Biocentric Psychology do not explicitly embrace each other and/or if enough of us don't embrace both of them--or some very close relatives thereof--for ourselves, then you, me and everybody will be double speaking "doublespeak" well before the occurrence of the Centennial celebration of "1984". A "celebration" that is being planned right now by your wannabe social engineers and social designer-controllers. And three: Dr. Peikoff succeeded (almost single handedly albeit with a little help from his friends) in warding off a Weimarcian society in America while at the same time inadvertently providing the Behaviorists, Cognitive Psychologist-Neurologists and all bureaucratic minds EVERYWHERE (thanks to the Internet) a reverse blueprint to follow as they work to bring to fruition their "utopian" view--updated and "modernized" out of necessity--of an America ruled by a VOLUNTARY TOTALITARIANISM.
Voluntary totalitarianism is pure Democracy's ultimate, inevitable, inescapable, "logical" end.
Your success at becoming autonomous man is our only defense against it.
We can see from our observations of their illusion worship and their TV repair man "explanation" of "psychology" that the self-contradictory nature of such a phrase as "voluntary totalitarianism" will not and does not bother "them"-- t.h.e.m, the Bureaucratic Minds and Social Engineers--in the least. Quite frankly, they simply believe that "people"--that is, you and me--are to stupid to get it.
And if the peoples start to get it?
Well...we'll just keep calling it something else.
How 'bout we call it "Behaviorism"?
Can't, they've already gotten that.
How about "Cognitive Psychology" then?
Well they 'kinda got that too because "psychology" has become synonymous with "Behaviorism" so that "Cognitive Behaviorism" is to easy to get.
OK. How about "Cognitive Neuroscience"?
Oooooooooh...Grrrr-ate! That sounds great. If Donna Shalala OK's it we'll go with it and publish it on p. 57 of her first report to the nation on mental health. A report telling those same people exactly how she and hers will spend the billions and billions and hopefully eventually (in less than 65 years) trillions of dollars that they, the democratic peoples, freely, openly and unabashedly gift the bureaucratic mind in the form of excessive tax revenue out of every paycheck of every pay period of every year of their productive lives.
"Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General" published in the last month of the last year of the last century of the last millennium by so many US Government agencies that it's difficult to count them all, explicitly lays it out for all of us to see. And what we can see is that the bureaucratic arms of the United States Government is pulling out all stops and is going to enlist and embrace the social engineering minded to Socially Engineer each and every one of us--one neuron at a time if that's what it takes--into submission and subservience to the anti-autonomous man mentality, whether we like it or not.
Unfortunately, some like it.
This mystic-collectivist-altruistic anti-autonomous man "mentality" is deeply embedded in the American "cultural mind" in a sense analogous to that which is embedded in sheep's "minds". That is, sheep are sheepish and if they could think and act from thoughts (which they cannot, but if they could) their "spiritual" quest would be to find a "sheepherder". Given the ever growing power of the bureaucratic mind as same is manifest in the NIMH and other Governmental agencies it appears as if our choice is being reduced to its barest essentials: Do you want to be a man (the autonomous kind) or a sheep. Here is one area in which religious people or more precisely "Christians" cannot escape the hot seat of judgment: Whose image is it that is (and at what age is it embedded), that shows Jesus as the quintessential sheepherder and you as a little sheep in his flock of sheep? It is not Ayn Rand's, this I know for sure, that is, for 100%, absolute sure.
The foregoing "vice of sheepishness" is the "danger" lurking in the mental pathways of our cultural selves and as you have witnessed here, BiO Spiritualism is the first book to explicitly advocate that what America needs most right now is individuals and especially adult individuals and what adult individuals need most is The Philosophy of Objectivism PLUS The Psychology of Biocentric Psychology and a book that shows them how to embrace and apply these two intellectual disciplines to help them to identify and then satisfy--with full and complete satiation--their own true spiritual needs.
If one believes--as the Objectivists do albeit not as I do but--as the (naïve?) Objectivists do that Religion is a primitive Philosophy then one has to believe that so too is it a primitive psychology (thinking lustful thoughts is the same--morally, psychologically, ethically, actually, practically--as acting them out in reality). Since psychology is to an important degree applied philosophy we can see that psychology is intimately connected to and all wrapped up in philosophy, which--to repeat, some believe--is a form of religion (or if you are an Objectivist, vice versa). Or to be more precise, [philosophy (to the naïve? Objectivist)] is a form that can include anything, even religion.
If this and the idea that the State is not suppose to endorse any particular Religion, then why--you may be wondering--the f*!@#&'h is it endorsing AND attempting to Institutionalize Cognitive Neuroscience?
Is it because they are the T.H.E.Y--the anti-Objective, the anti-reason, the anti-Ayn Rand, the anti-correct philosophy they--that are building a monument out of Kantian clay and calling it, Cognitive Neuroscience, the savior of us poor little wretched mentally ill people who don't know which end of the stick is up ... out of the water and hence not bent by slow moving light ... nor that The Group is the source of all good on earth and that since we absolutely refuse to get the message that (some) philosophers since Plato have been trying to ram down our throat (talk about abuse) T.H.E.Y will protect us from our self and finish building the monument. But, my real fear is, T.H.E.Y know Ayn Rand is correct and they are afraid of her and will do whatever it takes to maintain control over what they consider to be t.h.e.i.r flock, that is t.h.e.i.r sheep, that is you and me, that is, for shearing.
Is this the ultimate achievement for the Bureaucratic Mind and the Social Engineers: the wool they use to pull over our eyes is the same wool sheared from our own backs?!?!?!
But as Ayn Rand has told us, this is such a simple game to beat, all you have to do is: not play.
Of course this doesn't say what we should do as an alternative.
And do nothing is not an alternative.
But to do what you love is an alternative and is the preferred one.
The second choice is do what you love and can make a living at.
The third one is, do what productive work you must in order to live and set up for that day when you can do what you love.
But the goal, the motivator, the ultimate drive is to end up doing what you love. If you achieve this then you will be happy.
You will that is, if you also worship non-contradiction and joy. These are the "given" in the tenet that says, do the productive work you love and you will be happy.
Even as I write the foregoing a part of me feels like a naive person, forget naive realist or naïve objectivist or naive anything, just plain 'ole simple naive person--says the cynical within--is one who thinks he or she can actually live life creatively, passionately, ... happily! Where'd they get such a notion?
Well, I got mine from Objectivism and Biocentric Psychology, where'd you get yours?
You don't have one?
Now I see.