I'm not sure who doesn't know the following,
and my apologies for seeming to "lecture"
because I'm just blurting it out while I have
to be somewhere...
One problem of managing the human mind is
how to consider choose which problems truly are pertinent in a given situation, and how to address those problems objectively...in other words, address them independently of the influences of our personal programming.
These influences on personal programming include
* political experiences,
* previous statements we've made that we are still defending subtlely defending,
* subconscious memories from childhood experiences
* preferences learned or DNA-driven,
* or subtle pressures from other life forms.
How can one consider problems in a way where you KNOW you are applying NO personal skew at all? (and letting someone else direct you entirely does not do that, for that is a choice made for one of the above reasons).
If the system one uses is all inter-consistent and fully inter-supporting, such as the equations of physical science, then you have such an objective method. And perhaps the example of this might lead to more insight on a few of life's other issues. (Certainly, ignorance of physical science can contribute to having a skewed attitude both caused by and causing some problem solutions one proposes to be physically doomed to fail due to bad calculating.)
So that is one area where Dr. Dick's Long Essay
seems to be a problem solving guide -- how to approach some problems in a way you know is completely honest, and how to choose which problems to solve without .
The alternative is to choose problems, or even create problems, based on less than honest
I did not understand Harv's reference to 6AM scenario, and a search on this sight did not turn it up.
Both Alan and Harv might enjoy knowing that
Dr. Dick is much gentler in conversation than some persons they have yet to meet. I can attest to this from personal experience. I hope you guys appreciate that Dr. Dick, gruff as he is,
is not doing you any harm.