PHILOSOPHY FORUMS’ PHOBIA OF ORIGINAL THOUGHT

2656043491_86083bceffEditorial by Mark I Rasskazov, Editor in Chief.

I’m getting pretty tired of my comments being deleted «for being of low quality,» on the Philosophy Forums website, which is catch-all for «I just don’t like what you have to say.»  So I think it’s time to start documenting when I’m being silenced.  They have the right to act upon their phobia of original thought on their site, and I have the right to point it out when it happens.  I’m going start doing exactly that.

On Atticus II’s post entitled «Consciousness,» he writes:

«The concept is that there is a state of being aware, an awareness of being. Consciousness.  What we know about the brain is that it has developed through a long environmental and social struggle, to anticipate the future, maximize return on effort and minimize the risk and costs.  Why do people associate consciousness with a sense of self when it is more likely that the state and sense of arousal and alertness is predicted to be a necessity for our survival and to avoid our human stupidity?  If I look in the mirror there’s a face I recognize as my own, consciousness has no mirror and no concept of self or authenticity to begin with so how can it extract identity from actions, thoughts and emotions? How can it be self-awareness if it has no recognizable features?  Consciousness has an ecocentric basis even though it can be manipulated to seem egocentric, in any way people choose.»

I responded:

«I experience values, which manifest intentionality.  I take this to be evidence of the existence of my self.»

Is it a treatise?  No.  It is simple and succinct.  But it is also relevant and cogent.  It is not «of low quality.»

This post was deleted by the admin user, «Ying» for being «of low quality.»

This is the eighth comment of mine that has been deleted so far.  I do feel that I am being singled out, and I will be keeping a running tally of every comment of mine that is deleted from now on.

I enjoy making new friends — but failing that, I love a good fight, provided I have a good cause.  And this is is an excellent cause.

CONSTITUTIONAL WARRIOR CLASS

Members of the USA Military forces are thoroughly indoctrinated into the Law of War; a branch of international law which is the legal boundary of our military Rules of Engagement. Everyone, from the lowliest private to the loftiest general is repeatedly indoctrinated into this so that they fully understand it; in Initial Entry Training, through the commissioning sources, annually at home units, and as a required part of Mobilization training. A service member will receive training in the Law of War a MINIMUM of three times throughout a military contract. Most people will receive this training DOZENS of times throughout their military careers. The Law of War is based on the Geneva Convention Treaty, and is not a function of American Federal law.

With all of that having been said, it bears mentioning that every American soldier, whether enlisted or commissioned, must swear an oath to the Constitution of the United States in order to become inducted into military service; not the president, and not the government, and certainly not any international order, but to the Constitution of the United States.

How is it that US service members receive no, I say again, NO training on the US Constitution WHATSOEVER? Is it not ass backward that American soldiers are taught to serve an international treaty, while they are kept entirely in the dark about American law? Even US Military officers receive little to no training on the document that they have sworn to uphold, and are honor bound and responsible to protect. It is entirely possible to command a company of American soldiers without ever having read the US Constitution, yet you can believe that no one will reach that position without having become intimately familiar with the Geneva Convention, which is closely connected to the UN list of «Human Rights,» which, in reality, is a practical socialist manifesto, which outlines what governments are to provide for their people, and not what governments are limited from doing to an individual’s property and business.

The UN bill of «Human Rights» is antithetical to the US Constitution. Our service men are taught to uphold the former whilst ignoring the latter. This is outrageous.