"Higher Order Thinking Skills"
Benjamin Bloom's, Cognitive and Affective Taxonomies
"There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain 1964)
I encourage you to do with this article what I did with the over six hundred social-psychology books I read (one hundred and fifty of which are listed here). I read them through, two or three times when necessary, to make sure I fully understood what the author was actually saying before responding. Otherwise unlearned arguments ensue. While the body of this issue/article is fifteen pages, the next twenty-six page are endnotes, providing you with the particulars. Don't miss the Endnotes. Especially #3 and #10.
Through our use of "higher order thinking skills" we are blessed with cars, airplanes, TV's, computers, etc. "Higher order thinking skills" are used in science on material things, questioning and challenging established laws man has regarding nature in an effort to 'discover' new ones, i.e. applying theories or opinions to nature to see if they are true (observably constant) and then, if they are found to be true, putting them into practice creating "new" gadgets. But when Benjamin Bloom ("Bloom's Taxonomies") used "higher order thinking skills" on the children in the classroom, i.e. his "Taxonomy" being a "psychological classification system" (behavior "science"), he materialized them, i.e. making them subject only to the laws of nature, i.e., "human nature." By doing so he 'changed' their way of thinking and acting from truth to 'truth,' i.e. from facts (knowing because they have been told by their parent's, teacher, ,,, God) to "feelings" (knowing because they have experienced it for themselves) encouraging them to use "higher order thinking skills" on morals and ethics, i.e. "questioning and challenging" their parent's established laws, determining what is right and what is wrong behavior by themselves, i.e. according to their own carnal nature (desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment'), i.e., according to their own opinions, i.e. according to how they "felt" and what they "thought" in the given 'moment" (in the given situation), detoxing them (cleansing or washing their minds) of their parent's authority, i.e., their restraints, i.e., their established commands, rules, facts, and truth in the process.
While parent's might know that something is wrong in the "education" system (discernment tells you that something is wrong, but it is up to you to find out what it is), if they don't know what it is, i.e. understand how it is being done (and by whom), despite their best efforts to educate their children, their children (and they) can fall victim to what is wrong in "education." We are not be be ignorant of Satan's devices. After explaining Bloom's Taxonomies in over five thousand meetings over the past seventeen years, I have never had a teacher defend them when I finished. Most teachers know that something is wrong with them, but they do not knowing what. While parent's may never have heard of Bloom's Taxonomies, every certified teacher knows them by heart, having to use them to develop their classroom curriculum, creating a classroom environment in which to 'change' how their students will think and act.
According to Bloom's Taxonomies: Who created the problems of society? And how can they be negate?
Children carry their parents standards, their parents positions on issues, their parents "prejudices" (all three being the same) into the classroom, which has the potential of dividing (separating) the children from one another. Unless the children in the classroom have parent's who have the same position on issues, they will divide amongst (contend with) one another if their position (their parent's position) is brought up as an issue, especially if they hold fast to their parent's position, i.e. standards, i.e. "prejudices." By giving the children an experience (an "equal opportunity") to find out what they have in common with one another, the children must, within a "group" setting, set aside what makes them different, i.e. what divides them, i.e. set aside their parents' standards, positions, "prejudices." Only then will they be able to transcend the conditions of the traditional home, finding identity ("community") in themselves, 'discovering' themselves, i.e. how they personally "feel" and what they personally "think" regarding personal, social, and environmental issues (with personal-social-environmental issues amalgamated into one issue—"self," social, environmental survival), i.e. 'liberating' themselves from their parent's "prejudiced," "right-wrong," established way of thinking and acting. Transcending parental authority they 'discover' themselves to be "of nature only," i.e. adaptable to 'change' within 'changing' situations, making themselves subject to "'scientific' evaluation." "Science is only genuine science when it proceeds from sense experience, in the two forms of sense perception and sensuous need, that is, only when it proceeds from Nature [from the child's nature only]." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) Yet the scriptures warn us: "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 14:12 "O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23
As you will see, Bloom substituted the "consistency" of true science (facts) with the "definability" of so called science (making the child's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e. his "sense perception" and "sensuous needs," i.e. his opinion or theory the basis of 'truth,' i.e. of 'reality'). Bloom admitted that from the beginning there were questions, i.e., problems (from the scientific fields) concerning his Taxonomies. "It has been pointed out [by true scientists] that we are attempting to classify phenomena which could not be observed or manipulated in the same concrete form as the phenomena of such fields as the physical and biological sciences." " It was the view [opinion] of the group [of social-psychologists] that educational objectives stated in the behavior form ["top-down," "right wrong," parental authority (patriarchal paradigm with its established rules, commands, facts, and truth), absolutism vs. "equality," "approach pleasure-avoid pain," the child's nature (heresiarchal paradigm of 'changingness'), relativism] have their counterparts in the behavior of individuals [prejudices against immorality vs. tolerant of immorality] ... observe[able] and describ[able] therefore classifi[able]." (Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 1: Cognitive Domain 1954—from now on referred to as Book 1: Cognitive Domain) Eight years later Bloom admitted the truth about his 'truth.' That his 'truth' was only a "feeling," i.e. only an opinion, i.e. an unprovable theory. "Whether or not the classification scheme presented in Handbook I: Cognitive Domain is a true taxonomy is still far from clear." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain 1964—from now on referred to as Book 2: Affective Domain) Forty years later Bloom wrote: "Certainly the Taxonomy was unproven at the time it was developed and may well be 'unprovable.'" (Benjamin Bloom, Bloom's Taxonomy: A Forty Year Retrospect) Despite this fact (the truth), Bloom's Taxonomies are being used today in the classroom without abatement (as though they were facts—anyone, including teachers who questions them are regarded as being "irrational" and therefore "irrelevant," labeled as being against education, not a "team player," a resister to 'change,' i.e., psychological). Thomas Kuhn, who applied Bloom's methods in the scientific fields faced the same problems, yet continued anyway, since opinions (whether right or wrong) are to be treated as facts and applied, despite any evidence of failure. "Kuhn admitted problems with the schemata of his socio-psychological theory yet continued to urge its application into the scientific fields of astronomy, physics, chemistry and biology." (Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions)
All teachers are certified based upon their knowledge of how to apply Bloom's Taxonomies in their classrooms (use them to create curriculum, i.e. how they and their students are to think and act in the classroom). All schools (including private schools, vouchers, charter schools, home schools, etc. that receive federal funds, i.e. assistance, including via the states, counties, cities, or regions, or have teachers and test designers writing curriculum using Blooms' Taxonomies) are accredited based upon their use of them in their school system. If teachers and schools would refuse to use Bloom's Taxonomies in their classrooms (refuse to use any test created and evaluated by those using them) Common Core, only the lasts of a long line of government (Federal government) programs using the same process, i.e., Goals 2000, No-Child-Left-Behind (under parental authority), All-Children-Are-At-Risk (under parental authority), etc., i.e., socialist-globalist-environmentalist education would collapse.
Some home school material is being infiltrated with the use of Bloom's Taxonomies (curriculum writers having been trained in their use while in collage or during in-service training). So parents beware. Be discerning. Don't throw the material out when you see one or two lessons having the process in them (asking the children their opinions, i.e. how the "feel" and what they "think," regarding the lesson, circumventing "right" or "wrong" or "true" or "false" as an answer, i.e., your or God's authority). When you discern that something is wrong write your own lessons instead. If you see a pattern developing only, then get rid of the material. In that case, use older material (as long as they are reliable) or write your own lessons and/or get the publishers to quiet hiring people who use Bloom's Taxonomies.
Bloom's Taxonomies are all about 'changing' how the children think and act. It is using the classroom (as a "laboratory") to 'liberate' the thoughts and the actions of the children from the "old" world order of parental authority ("top-down" authority), creating a "new" world order of "equality," i.e. creating a world void of parental restraint i.e. void of Godly restraint. The idea being: if you can use the classroom to negate parental ("top-down") authority in the thoughts and actions of the children, you can eventually negate Godly ("top-down") authority in society. You can see the effect Bloom's Taxonomies have had upon this nation since their introduction in education in the 50's and 60's.
Evaluating Bloom's Taxonomies through a traditional mind:
Within the traditional home, when the Father gives rules and commands, i.e. "Take out the garbage" for example, the child knows what he is to do, Knowledge being the first stage of Bloom's Cognitive Domain (although Bloom defined it differently, as he did all his stages, defining it according to dialectic 'reasoning' which negates the Father's authority, i.e. negates parental authority in the thoughts and actions of the child). Then as the Father asks the child if he comprehended what he just said, i.e. "Do you understand what I just said," i.e. meaning "You had better do what I say, 'or else,'" the child becomes subject to the Father's authority, Comprehending being the second stage of Bloom's Cognitive Domain. At this point (the thesis stage of established laws) the Father's authority is made clear to the child. It is up to the child to either obey and be blessed or disobey and be punished, an either-or condition, with obedience being the expected behavior.
This is where Bloom's third stage i.e. Application, comes into play, with, in this case, the child not "feeling" like doing the Father's will, not wanting to take the garbage out, deciding instead to do what he "feels" like doing in the 'moment,' i.e. go and play. It is here that the child, in a traditional home, learns the value of obedience. His Analysis of his behavior (Bloom's fourth stage), as the Father takes him to the "wood shed," chastening him for his disobedience, is that he had better pay attention to (attend and respond to) the Father's commands and rules (do what his Father says). It is in the Father's authority to chasten His children (when they are disobedient) that the child's behavior, i.e. "human nature" (the antithesis condition, created by the child's "feelings" and "thoughts," creating resistance or tension against authority) is restrained, restoring him to the Father's authority, i.e. with the child learning the importance of knowing, i.e. according to the Father's will. "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction." Proverbs 1:7 This pattern, as explained in Hebrews 12:5-11, is where each child is personally ("individually") held accountable for his personal ("individual") actions before the Father, creating (initiating and sustaining) individuality, under the parent (and according to dialectic 'reasoning,' eventually creating individuality, under God, i.e. the "top-down" pattern or paradigm of the parent's way of thinking and acting and God's being the same—the earthly father, being of the earth, chastening his children for his own pleasure, God, i.e. the Heavenly Father, being from Heaven, chastening us that we might partake in his Holyness).
Known as duality, right-wrong (either-or) thinking carries with it a certainty, i.e. "Because dad said so," i.e. "Because I say so," i.e. "Because it is." Therefore duality (right-wrong thinking and acting) is not tolerant of putting ambiguity, i.e. opinion, i.e. deviancy, i.e. theory, i.e. uncertainty into practice. It is the "guilty conscience," i.e. the Father's voice within the child, i.e. His threat of judgment upon him for his wrong actions, that keeps the child from going in the wrong direction when apart from His Father, keeping him from following his "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e. from acting out his opinion and/or the opinions of others according to the current situation, directing him instead to do the right thing—thinking and acting according to the Father's will. The Father's authority is 1) the giving (the preaching and teaching) of rules, commands, facts, and truth to his children to be accepted and obeyed "as given" or "as is" (by faith), i.e. to be carried out without questioning their validity (if there are any questions they are asked in respect for the office, i.e. honoring the Father's authority, i.e. they are asked only to correct any misunderstanding as to what to do and how to do it, to know more about what to do and how to do it, or to know if there might be or suggest another way of doing it, accepting "No" as an answer without "murmuring"), 2) blessing those children who obey, 3) chastening those children who disobey, and 4) casting out those children who disrespect His authority (behave in a way that he can no longer rule over them, with their rebellion affecting the family). "Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth." Ephesians 6:1-3
Notice the clause, "in the Lord," meaning parents are under authority as well, i.e. under God. Therefore if the parents command the child to do an ungodly deed, despite what the parents might do to him, chastening him or casting him out (the parent's right), the child (in the Lord, i.e. under God) has the right to not obey, having a clear conscience before God. Interestingly, by making "the group" God, the same outcome applies (NOT). In that case the conscience (subject to one, restraining "feelings") becomes a super-ego (subject to the many as one, subject to "feelings"), which sears (negates) the conscience, i.e. replaces chastening and casting out with negating, i.e. neutralizing, marginalizing, and removing, i.e. killing the entrenched resistor to 'change.' While conscience means "with science," which is established laws, the super-ego ties the child's will to his "feelings" and the "feelings" of others, which makes the law of the flesh, i.e. the child's carnal nature law, i.e. making the child antithetical to God's will. "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called [the antithesis of "so called knowledge," where theories are treated as 'knowledge' and 'truth,'' and then put into practice as knowledge and truth, where opinions are treated as 'reality']:" 1 Timothy 6:20
The child's nature is to approach pleasure and avoid pain. His behavior is influenced (controlled) by the current situation or environment that engenders pleasure or has the potential of engendering pleasure (thus "encouraging" him to approach the condition, situation, or environment that is engendering pleasure). Likewise, his behavior is influenced (controlled) by the current situation or environment that is engendering pain or has the potential of engendering pain—with the absence of or the missing out on pleasure being pain as well—(thus "encouraging" him to avoid the condition, situation, or environment that is engendering pain). When we come into contact with, become aware of, or think upon (imagine) a gratifying object in the environment, our nervous system naturally 'liberates' dopamine (a chemical our body naturally produces, known as a neurotransmitter) into a small gap between the nerve endings (called a synaptic gap), engendering our ability to to become aware of and/or think upon something which is in the environment. Thus, when a child is grabbing for an object of gratification it is more than likely he is doing so to initiate or sustain dopamine 'emancipation,' i.e. pleasure. Although he (and his parents) may not know it, he is not in love with the gratifying object itself. He is in love with (wants) the dopamine (the sensation of pleasure) that is 'emancipated' within his nervous system when it comes into contact with an object of gratification, i.e. when he becomes aware of it or hopes to attain it. Immanuel Kant wrote in Critique of Pure Reason: hope is in happiness, happiness is in pleasure, pleasure is in the mind. Now we know that that "pleasure" is dopamine being 'emancipated' into the synaptic gaps within our nervous system when we come into contact with a gratifying object, i.e. consciousness taking place within our brain, where we become aware of the pleasure or pain, or when we are thinking upon it, making all things by our nature, sensual, i.e. i.e. material, i.e. of the earth, i.e. of the here-and-now. Because the child, according to his nature, is living for the pleasures of the 'moment,' he is subject to the ever 'changing' environment which stimulates it. With his thoughts and actions being subject to his impulses and urges of the 'moment, i.e. "lusting" after the things of the world, he is therefore readily adaptable to 'change,'' i.e. "unstable" in all his ways (2 Peter 2:7-22). Unless his nature (to be "equal" with, i.e. to become at-one-with nature) is restrained by parental authority (by "top-down" authority) he will behave as thought he owns whatever it is that is pleasurable to him in the 'moment,' grabbing for (insisting upon, i.e. demanding) whatever he "wants" in the 'moment.' "Freud saw that in the id [the child's nature to become at-one-with the world in pleasure in the 'moment'] there is no negation [no parental authority, i.e. no "Thou shalt not's" restraining him], only affirmation and eternity [only the positive "eternal present" (yet the fleeting 'moment') of pleasure]." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
If we apply ways of thinking (doing right and not wrong vs. approaching pleasure and avoiding pain) to structures, i.e. systems of thought and action, i.e. or paradigms, then this explains why socialists think and act as though they own everything they see—behaving as unrestrained children wanting to "control" everything in the world that stimulates dopamine 'emancipation,' i.e. Eros, i.e. pleasure, i.e. "enjoyment," i.e. "lust," i.e. including your property, your business, your children, and even you (and your spouse), lying to you, trying to deceive you into believing that what they are doing is for the "good" of "the people" (and therefore "good" for you). "But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." James 1:14, 15 Capitalism means to capitulate, as in doing your best "as unto the Lord," i.e. the child obeying the Father despite his not getting carnal pleasure out of it in the 'moment' for himself—thinking and acting according to the flesh). His pleasure is in pleasing the one he is serving (thinking and acting according to the spirit) and/or doing the job "right." The former focuses upon the emotions of the 'moment' (sensuousness), i.e. "lusting" after the pleasures of the 'moment' ("loving" others because of the pleasures they are engendering or have the potential of engendering within themselves—making social systems, i.e. freeing themselves from parental authority, the issue of concern), while the latter focuses upon doing the job right the first time (righteousness), whether pain or pleasure is being engendered in the situation (loving the person despite the pain, including the missing out on pleasure, they are experiencing—making morality and competence, i.e. obeying and pleasing the parent, the issue of concern). While the former seeks to do the job "right," "right" meaning making sure they are having pleasure and not pain while working ("suffering," "sacrificing") for "the people," i.e. working with "the group," the latter gets pleasure from doing the job right (the first time), the issue being not to do the job wrong.
A parent's love for their children is the closest worldly man can come to 'rationally' understanding God's love for man. George Hegel advocated the child's love for the world, i.e. i.e. the child's love for pleasure, i.e. the child's following after anyone who provides or promises to provide it pleasure (sensuousness, i.e. "human nature") over and against the child's love for the Father, i.e. the child's honoring of the Father's authority, loving Him and desiring to obey (not disobey) His commands and rules, trusting in the Father, that he knows best. Hegel wrote: "When a man has finally reached the point where he does not think he knows it better than others [making the father and the mother, like the child, subject to their carnal nature of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain], that is when he has become indifferent to what they have done badly and he is interested only in what they have done right, then peace and affirmation have come to him." (Carl Friedrich, The Philosophy of Hegel) The 'shift' is subtle, devious, and insidious. By being "indifferent" to the child's bad behavior (or when he has done things wrong) 'liberates' the child from the Father's authority, i.e. from righteousness, i.e. from having to do things right the first time, making sensuousness ("peace and affirmation," i.e. pleasure, i.e. the child's approval of his carnal nature and the carnal nature of others) the standard by which to think and act by. Thus friendship with the world synthesized with the family becomes "community," negating the traditional home, communism synthesized with capitalism becomes communitization, negating private property and private business (inalienable rights), public synthesized with private becomes public-private partnership, negating private, the individual child synthesized with "the group" become socialism, negating the individual child, under the Father's authority, i.e. man under God's authority, 'creating' a "new" world order of "equality"—engendering such words as communitization, democratization, conscietization, synergism, etc. where love is found in compromising for the sake of building "human relationships," not in doing the Father's will, i.e. doing the job right the first time.
The issue therefore was how to 'change' the child's way of thinking and acting without the child (and/or his parents) waking up to the fact and turning education back into it's "old" way of thinking and acting, i.e. "restoring the "old" ("top-down," "right-wrong") world order in the classroom, thereby preventing 'change,' i.e. preventing the "new" ("equality," "augmenting pleasure-attenuating pain") world order from becoming 'reality,' i.e. preventing the children of the world from uniting as "one," in pleasure, living in the 'moment,' negating parental authority in the process. According to dialectic 'reasoning,' parental authority is the source of prejudice within the society, despite the fact that it those who are of dialectic in 'reasoning,' as "children of disobedience," who are prejudiced, i.e. prejudiced against parental authority. While preaching "love" for "humanity," i.e. love for the flesh, they must put into praxis, i.e. into social action the child's hatred toward parental authority, i.e. when he has to do what they tell them to do when it gets in his way of having pleasure, "repressing" his nature and "alienating" him from the rest of the world. Room for "error," i.e. not insisting that the child do things right the first time, but allowing him to keep trying until he "gets it" right ("trial and error," "tolerance of ambiguity") had to become the way of "thinking" and acting in the classroom if 'change' in the student's way of thinking and acting was to become a 'reality.' Bloom's Taxonomies are all about giving birth to a "new" world order of "openness," requiring the approval of resentment (hostility, i.e. negative "feelings") towards parental authority in the classroom, i.e. treating their commands and rules as being "irrational" and therefore their authority as being "irrelevant,' thereby negating parental authority (by engendering "group think," i.e. socialism) in the thoughts and actions of the next generations of citizens in the process.
Bloom, in his Cognitive Domain, Book 1, recognized that during the period of time between the child's honoring of his parents authority to the questioning and challenging of it, he become unstable in his "skills and abilities," i.e. "Skills and abilities may thus be rather unstable and unpredictable," i.e. the child having to learn new behavior (letting his "feelings," i.e. his propensity toward pleasure, i.e. his natural "lusting" after the gratifying things of the world have input in the decision making process regarding what is right and what is wrong behavior, i.e. what is of worth and what is not), i.e. which is not in line with his "old" way of doing things—obeying his parent's commands without questioning or challenging their authority—which requiring him to set aside (miss out on) pleasure and endure pain (including enduring disapproval and rejection by "the "group") if or when necessary, in doing the Father's will. Bloom, instead of grading the child according to his behavior, i.e. whether he did his assignment right or wrong, i.e. according to the teacher's "top-down" commands and rules, graded (taxonomised) each child's, parent's, teacher's, school's, "community's," "intentions," i.e. whether their "feelings" were manifested in (were in agreement with or in "alignment" with) their behavior and their behavior manifested their "feelings," i.e. grading them along the spectrum of whether they were seeking the approval of "the group" (supporting "community," i.e. socialism-globalism-environmentalism—under the control, i.e. manipulation of the facilitators of 'change') or were still holding onto the approval of the Father (supporting the Father's authority, i.e. individualism, under God), i.e. grading them according to where along the spectrum or continuum of 'change' they were in the 'moment,' thus being able to prepare their next classroom assignments, i.e. selecting the appropriate information from which to "help" them 'willingly' "move" further down the spectrum of 'change,' sustaining their development into 'willing' workers, laboring for the common-ist cause.
Bloom's 'shift' in how the child (and therefore the world) is to think and act was based upon his rejection of duality (right-wrong thinking and acting i.e. sustaining established facts and truth) and his embracing of plurality1 (along the pleasure-pain spectrum of "feelings," i.e. of "human nature," i.e. strongly approve, somewhat approve, approve, disapprove, somewhat disapprove, strongly disapprove, no opinion, thus turning truth into opinions and knowledge into theories). Thus the worth of the day, i.e. the worth of the object or person—the child (born or unborn) or the adult (of good or bad health, young or old)—is based upon the amount of pleasure that they are experiencing and/or are giving, or have the potential of giving to others, i.e. are able to contribute to society, i.e. contribute to "the group," versus the amount of pain they are experiencing, inflicting, or have the potential of inflicting, upon others (upon "the group"), i.e. burdening "the group," i.e. society, i.e. the "community." By moving the issue of the 'moment' from individualism, under the Father's authority, i.e. doing right and not wrong, where the child is personally being held accountable for his own actions before one person, i.e. before the Father (the student before the teacher, the worker before the boss, the representative before his constituent, the minister before God and His Word), to "ingroup-outgroup," socialist issues (Theodor Adorno), where the worth of the person (the student, etc.) is based upon his approval of "group life" (where "the many," i.e. "the people" feel, think, and act as "one"), where the child's way of thinking and acting, i.e. his values (his loyalties) are not only being evaluated but 'change' at the same time (by 'willingly' participating in the process, i.e. by allowing his "feelings," i.e. for or against the Father's authority or for or against "the group" or somewhere in between, to be tested"—the deception is that a person can have loyalty to both, i.e. along a spectrum of 'change,' when in truth there can only be loyalty to the one, i.e. to the Father's authority, i.e. thinking and acting according to faith, or to the other, i.e. to "the group," i.e. thinking and acting according to sight, i.e. Luke 16:13).
With His children growing up under His "top-down" authority (called a patriarchal paradigm), i.e. accepting it as the right way of feeling, thinking, and acting, the Father's authority is carried out into the public arena. It is carried into education with teachers 1) giving rules, commands, facts, and truth to be accepted and obeyed "as is," i.e. to be carried out without questioning their validity (if there are any questions they are asked in respect for the office, i.e. honoring the teachers authority, i.e. they are asked only to correct any misunderstanding as to what to do and how to do it, know more about what to do and how to do it, or know if there might be or suggest another way of doing it, accepting "No" as an answer without "murmuring"), 2) blessing those students (children) who obey (do their homework right), 3) chastening those students who do not obey (giving bad grades to those students who do their homework wrong or do not do it, and physically chastising those who behave badly), and 4) casting out those children who disrespect the teacher's authority, i.e. disrupt the class, thereby initiating and sustaining the "old" world order of "top-down" authority. The conditions that apply to the children, i.e. under God (Ephesians 6:1), applies to the students as well.
It is therefore carried into the workplace with the employer (private landowner, businessman, etc.) having the rights of 1) - 4), with the employees having the right, under God, to not carry out ungodly orders (Ephesians 6:1 and Romans 13:1-6)—known as "freedom of the conscience." It is carried into government with the constituents (the citizens) having the rights of 1) - 4) (the representatives, in this case, as children, are sent to re-present the parents, i.e. their constituents position), with the constituents having the right, under God, to not carry out ungodly laws which their representatives (now including court and president) have passed (Ephesians 6:1 and Romans 13:1-6). Thus all institutions which honour the Father's authority, initiate and sustain the parent's "top-down" way of thinking and acting within the neighborhoods, towns and cities, townships, counties, states, nation, and the world (dividing the world amongst itself).
"Higher order thinking skills" when used on morals and ethics, negates this "top-down" order, making the child's nature ("human nature") the standard by which to determine what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is evil behavior. Thereby, by 'changing' the home, the schools, the workplace, government, and even the "church" into institutions of "higher learning," they are 'changed' from being institutions promoting godly restraint (engendering division within the world) into institutes negating godly restraint (engendering unity within the world), with the children (collectively) becoming "as god," righteous in and of themselves, thinking and acting according to what they all have in common, i.e. "human nature."
"Higher order thinking skills" when used on morals and ethics becomes dialectic 'reasoning,'2 negating the Patriarchal Paradigm, i.e. negating the Father's authority (the parents' authority over their children) in the thoughts and actions of the children when put into praxis (into social action). It is about turning the child's thoughts from the Father's "Not" (as in "Thou shalt not") to his own "ought" (as in "I ought to be able to"), i.e. negating the Father's "Not" in his thoughts and actions, allowing him to make his "ought, i.e. his opinion 'reality.'
By Bloom going to Synthesis (some swap Synthesis and Evaluation, i.e. Bloom's fifth and six stages—today all stages are defined in verb form, i.e. motion, instead of nouns, i.e. labels or rigid—Robert J. Marzano, i.e. "Marzano's Taxonomies" has "updated" Bloom's works, redefining Bloom's Cognitive Domain from "Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation" to "retrieval, comprehension, analysis, knowledge utilization, metacognition, and self-system thinking,", keeping it in sink with Common Core, i.e. "assessing students progress," where they are along the spectrum from individualism, under the Father's authority, i.e. under God, to socialism-globalism-environmentalism) the students must find what they have in common with each other in their classroom experience, i.e. their "'feeling' of dissatisfaction" with having to do what someone else tells them to do without it having any meaning to them, i.e. their "feelings" (desires or "ought's") having no part in the event, i.e. getting no pleasure out of it for themselves other than the pleasure of pleasing the one in authority over them (carnal man, void of the Holy Spirit, can only 'reason' this way). By introducing the Affective Domain3 into the classroom curriculum, Bloom 'changed' education, i.e. the curriculum and therefore the classroom environment from the learning of facts and truth (individualism, under God) to the "building of 'human relationships'" (socialism, under the control of facilitators of 'change'). Therefore, the children's parent's differing positions on issues (their right-wrong way of thinking and acting, which comes into the classroom with each child) must be put aside by each child, if they are to come to synthesis or consensus., i.e. to come to a "feeling" of "oneness" regarding the persona-social-environmental issues of the day, i.e. how they would deal with them themselves, i.e. collectively.
The approval of the many, i.e. "the group" (socialism) replaces the approval of the one, i.e. the parent (individualism). Instead of the parent being treated as god (although they are not—"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it." Matthew 10:34-39), "the group" is treated as god, with the facilitator of 'change' leading the way. The classroom environment, with the teacher either preaching and teaching facts and truth, for the students to accept without question (by faith) or with the teacher encouraged the students to dialogue their opinions amongst themselves, coming to a consensus as to a possible solution to social issues, directly affects how student think and act when the come out of the classroom. "[Kurt] Lewin emphasized that the child takes on the characteristic behavior of the group in which he is placed. . . . he reflects the behavior patterns which are set by the adult leader of the group." (Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education) 'Change' the curriculum (the structuring or paradigm) of the classroom (give the children the option of either obeying their parent's rules and commands, which keeps them from doing what they want to do, or doing what they want to do, i.e. with group approval) and you 'change' society.
With all the children agreeing upon what is natural (agreeable to them all) becoming the 'norm" ("normal"), any thought or behavior which can not come into agreement, i.e. refuses to compromise for the sake of "human relationship," i.e. is not natural, becomes 'labeled' as "abnormal," standing in the way of "group harmony." Coming to consensus (a "group feeling" of "oneness") based upon the child's "feelings" and "thoughts" (with his "thoughts" taken captive to his "feelings" which are taken captive to the sensuous environment of the 'moment,' i.e. with the child concerned about the group's "approval" or "disapproval" to his response, i.e. his "feeling," "thoughts," and behavior). In this way, i.e. with each child focusing upon "group approval" rather than upon their Father's approval (a condition known as "group dynamics" and "force field analysis"—Kurt Lewin), the child is 'liberated' (at least for the 'moment') from the Father's authority, i.e. freed from having to obey his Father's commands, i.e. freed from fearing the Father's judging and chastening of him for his disobedience (freed of God's commands and threat of judgment, i.e. as Satan's statement "You shalt not surely die" 'liberated' the woman in the garden in Eden from God's command and threat of judgment), finding synthesis, i.e. unity with the other children of like thoughts and actions (of "human nature" only) instead, in an "open-ended," "non-directed" ("We can talk about anything" and "no one is to judge us, i.e. 'tell' us how we are to feel, think, and act") environment (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy—with Rogers confessing: "Experience is, for me, the highest authority." "Neither the Bible nor the prophets, neither the revelations of God [nor parental authority] can take precedence over my own [the child's own] direct experience.").
Evaluation is the child's ability to use this same method (dialectic 'reasoning') in all the events of his life, overcoming all situations which prevent him from being "normal," which prevent him from thinking and acting according to "human nature," which prevent him from thinking and acting in harmony with all the other children of the world, 'liberating' himself and all the other children of the world from the Father's authority.5 For these last two stages (synthesis and evaluation) to become 'reality,' the Father's rules, commands, facts, and truth must be called into question and His authority must be challenged, i.e. evaluated in the "light" of the current situation or crisis. "The eclipse of a way thinking [the 'changing' of the child's paradigm] cannot take place without a crisis [without his "feeling" the need to 'change,' i.e. to question and challenge his current paradigm]." (Antonio Gramsci, The Prison Notebooks) The "old" way of thinking, i.e. that "hard and fast truths ... exist for all time and places," must be called into question. Bloom wrote in Book 1: "We recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places." (Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Book 1 Cognitive Domain) By Bloom making this one of his "educational objectives" in his Taxonomy (the preferred outcome), he brought Marx's paradigm into the classroom. Marx's method of 'reasoning,' i.e. "higher order thinking skills" in morals and ethics was: "In the eyes of the dialectical process, nothing is established for all times, nothing is absolute or sacred." (Karl Marx) George Hegel wrote: "What truly is always true is that all is in flux, the truth-seeker ought properly to address himself to the study of this life process of truth seeking itself." (Carl Friedrich, The Philosophy of Hegel) Martin Luther King Jr. wrote: "The philosopher Hegel said that truth is not found in the thesis nor the antithesis but in an emerging synthesis which reconciles the two." (Martin Luther King Jr., Strength to Love) In other words, truth is not found in one position or in another, i.e. in opposing positions, i.e. not in the parent's nor in the child's position on an issue (not in God nor in individual man) but in the 'moment' of compromise they are taking, suspending their position for the sake of initiating and sustaining "human relationship," i.e. creating "oneness." "Truth is a moment in correct praxis [correct emotive experience, i.e. the child experiencing becoming "one" (in thought and in action) with himself, with others, and with nature, all at the same time]." (Antonio Gramsci, The Prison Notebooks)
George Hegel explained it this way: "Lawfulness without law." In other words, the child's nature, i.e. thinking and acting according to the laws of nature, i.e. the law of the flesh must influence (take precedence over) his decision-making instead of the laws of the Father if he is to find unity with the world, i.e. become at-one-with the nature (with himself and others), in pleasure, in the 'moment.' After all, the scriptures confirm that the conflict is between the child's nature, i.e. "all that is of the world" and the Father's authority. "If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever." 1 John 2:16-18 "No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Luke 16:13 Rejecting the Father's authority, those of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. facilitators of 'change' can only see one master, i.e. "mammon," i.e. the nature of the child.
If lasting socialist 'change,' i.e. globalism is to be initiated and sustained—the basis of "Sustainable Development"—the child's internal conflict (antithesis) between the Father's authority (law, restraining the child's carnal "feelings") and his own carnal desires (lawfulness, i.e.his urges and impulses of the 'moment' drawing him to become at-one-with nature—which stimulated him to do so in the first place), yet with his Father's authority (law) prevailing, i.e. known as a "guilty conscience," i.e. Romans 7:14-25 has to be exposed, defined, confronted, and overcome. But, unlike the solution found in Romans 7:25, i.e. having faith in the only begotten Son of God, Jesus Christ, who obeyed His Father in all things, the Father imputing His Son's obedience, i.e. righteousness to all who have faith in Him, dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. "higher order thinking skills" in morals and ethics, elevates the law of the flesh, i.e. "human nature" above (over and against) the law of the Father, i.e. negating the law of faith by making the "Son" a savior from the law, i.e. saving "the people" from the "establishment" of the day, i.e. living and dying for the cause of the "oppressed" instead (resurrection only being found in the hope of man 'discovering' himself, being "born again" by become at-one-with himself, with others, and with the world in pleasure, in the moment, i.e. becoming of "human nature" only, i.e. 'liberated' from the Father's authority). "One of the most fascinating aspects of group therapy is that everyone is born again, born together in the group." (Irvine D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)
If the child evaluates his thoughts and actions (the world) from the Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth then he remains subject to the Father's authority (law). But if he evaluates his thoughts and actions (the world) from "human nature," which comes naturally, i.e. from within himself (lawfulness), he is 'liberated' from the Father's authority. Only by evaluating the Father's authority, himself, and the world according to "lawfulness," i.e. "human nature," as was done in the garden in Eden, Genesis 3:1-6, can the child find unity with his own nature, can the student find unity with "the group," can man find unity with the world, working with it (his own nature, "the group," and the world) to create a "new" world order, i.e. becoming a "social servant," working for the common-ist cause, dedicated to initiating and sustaining 'worldly' peace and 'socialist' harmony, negation from himself and the world that which engenders disharmony, i.e. parental authority.
It is the role of the educator (the facilitator of 'change,' the 'lab' technician) to create the right environment if 'change' to take place. Without bringing the child's personal "feelings" into play (his dissatisfaction with the Father's authority, restraining his carnal desires), society would remain as it was in the past, resisting 'change.' "In fact, a large part of what we call 'good teaching' is the teacher's ability to attain affective objectives through challenging the student's fixed beliefs and getting them to discuss issues." "The major impact of the new program is to develop attitudes and values toward learning which are not shared by the parents." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 2 Affective Domain 1964) Instead of evaluating social issues from the parent's perspective, social issues are instead evaluated from the child's "feeling's," his affective domain. In this way his "feelings" can be used in the classroom to reinforce the socialist propaganda that authority figures repress their citizens, as parent's repress their children. While dad and mom are not perfect, they may be downright tyrants, i.e. using the office of authority they find themselves in for their own carnal gain, the office itself is perfect, given to them by God. According to dialectic 'reasoning,' it is this office that is of issue. Negate the Father's authority in the child and there is no God above man but only man as man, i.e. united as "one," becoming god themselves6. The idea being, as Satan explained it in the garden, if you no longer fear God (fear His judgment), you can become like god yourself, deciding what is right and what is wrong according to your own nature, 'creating' a world (a "new" world order) based upon your own nature.
The scriptures warn us: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 By opening up the child's heart, making it the ground from which to determine right from wrong, Bloom admits that he has opened up "Pandora's Box," a box full of evil, which once opened can not be closed. Bloom wrote: "It is in this 'box' that the most influential controls are to be found." "The affective domain [the heart of the child, i.e. Pandora's Box] contains the forces that determine the nature of an individual's life and ultimately the life of an entire people." "We are not entirely sure that opening our ‘box' is necessarily a good thing; we are certain that it is not likely to be a source of peace and harmony ...." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 2 Affective Domain 1964) But he opened it up in the classroom anyway, knowing what affect it would have upon the home as well as society, allowing those of abomination to have 'liberty' without having a "guilty conscience." But to create a world of 'change,' i.e. a "new" world order 'liberated' from the Father's authority, according to Bloom, the child's heart, (his dissatisfaction with parental authority) had to be opened and it was the role of the educator (the facilitator of 'change') in the classroom (in the workplace, in the government, in the "church") to do the job. incest
It is important to note that the first four commandments (of the Ten Commandments) are sacred, dealing with man before God. The next six are secular, dealing with man's relationship with man, under God. It is important to note that the first of the six, which the next five depend upon, reads: "Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee." Exodus 20:12 Is it no wonder that we are facing the ills of the last five in our nation, i.e. killing, adultery, stealing, lying, coveting, having removed the fifth from the classroom.
What Bloom meant by "higher order thinking skills," i.e. the tools of Common Core, is that the child's experience in the classroom must be about learning how to 'liberate' himself and all the other children of the world from the influences of the traditional home, paving the way for socialism, i.e. globalism, i.e. the "new" world order (freed of parental authority). Bloom admitted the affects his Taxonomy (deliberately) was having in the home as it was being applied in the classroom. "There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 2 Affective Domain 1964) In the 50's and 60's we witnessed the mortification of the traditional home, with children becoming increasingly disrespectful of parental authority. While parents were supporting Bloom's educational system, thinking his curriculum was teaching their children "higher order thinking skills" on rocks, plants, and animals, teachers using his curriculum in their classrooms were instead teaching them "higher order thinking skills" on morals and ethics, i.e. 'liberating' them from parental authority.
It was through the introduction of Bloom's Taxonomies into the classroom that the classroom became a "laboratory," i.e. an "experiential" environment where the children could safely 'discover' themselves (without their parents' knowledge), i.e. 'discovering' who they 'really' were (outside of their parents authority "forcing" them to think and act according to their standards and their way of thinking and acting). If 'change' (in the child and in society) was to become a 'reality' the child's classroom experince had to be 'changed.' If children were to be 'liberating' from their "old" way of thinking and acting, i.e. thinking and acting according to their parent's "top-down" way of thinking and acting, they had to be introduced to a "new" way of thinking and acting. Bloom wrote: "objectives [of 'changing' the child's paradigm, and therefore the world] can best be attained where the individual is separated from earlier environmental conditions and when he is in association with a group of peers who are changing in much the same direction and who thus tend to reinforce each other." "To create effectively a new set of attitudes and values, the individual must undergo great reorganization of his personal beliefs and attitudes and he must be involved in an environment which in many ways is separated from the previous environment in which he was developed. ...many of these changes are produced by association with peers who have less authoritarian points of view, as well as through the impact of a great many courses of study in which the authoritarian pattern is in some ways brought into question while more rational and non-authoritarian behaviors are emphasized." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Book II Affective Domain) The training manual, Human Relations in Curriculum Change, developed by the first National Training Laboratory in Bethel, Maine, described the task at hand: "The basic task of re-education [undoing the effects of parental authority upon the child and therefore society] is to change the individual's social perception, thereby changing the individual's social action." "Re-education aims to change the system of values and beliefs of an individual or a group." "The objective sought will not be reached so long as the new set of values is not experienced by the individual as something freely chosen." "An outright enforcement of the new set of values and beliefs is simply the introduction of a new god who has to fight with the old god, now regarded as a devil." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
Warren Bennis noted that to negate the parent's authority in the children "it is necessary artificially to create an experiential chasm between parents and children." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society) It is in this "experiential chasm" (being used today in Common Core) that the children 'discover' what they have in common, i.e. their desire to be-at-one with nature, in pleasure, in the 'moment,' as well be 'liberated' from the parent's authority, the source of their disharmony, i.e. "repression," "alienation," and "neurosis," not only in their lives but in the lives of all the children around the world. Instead of sitting under the preaching and teaching system of their parent's, learning established facts and truth, they were now introduced to a new system which encouraged them to dialogue their opinions, i.e. how they personally "feel" and what they personally "think" about personal-social-environmental issues of the 'moment.' Identifying themselves (their common interests) in each other they are able to 'liberate' themselves from their parent's way of thinking and acting, 'discovering' themselves within the "common ground of their existence," i.e. their "human nature" of approaching pleasure and avoiding pain (doing right and not wrong according to some "alien" authority, no longer being an issue). "Then both parties recognize their rigidified position in relation to each other as the result of detachment and abstraction from their common life context. And in the latter, the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence." (Jürgen Habermas, The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory)
The sole purpose of using Bloom's Taxonomies in the classroom is to negate the Father's authority in the children. The Father's authority engenders individualism, resulting in the children holding to their parent's position, resisting 'change' despite the pressure of the group. The issue is how to overcome the influence of the Father's authority upon the children, i.e. the "guilty conscience." It is through the use of "higher order thinking skills" in morals and ethics that the children can be not only 'liberated' from their Father's authority but also transformed7 into socialists. As Karl Marx stated: "It is not individualism [where every individual man will stand before God (as a child before his Father, as a student before his teacher, as a worker before his boss, etc.) and be held accountable for his actions, i.e. doing right and not wrong according to His will, i.e. living according to His Words] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society ["human relationship," i.e. "community," i.e. "equality" according to the flesh, according to "human nature," i.e. "We working for Us," i.e. socialism, i.e. common-ism, i.e. men dialoguing their opinions, i.e. how they "feel" and what they "think" in the 'moment' to a consensus, i.e. to a "feeling" of "oneness," i.e. compromising or suspending their position (the parent's commands and rules) for the sake of unity, i.e. for the sake of socialist harmony and worldly peace, etc.] is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities." (John Lewis, The Life and Teaching of Karl Marx)
It's is through the use of Bloom's Taxonomies in the classroom, i.e. Marx and Freud united as one8 in dialectic 'reasoning,' that the thoughts and actions of our nation have been 'changed,' i.e. from respecting authority to the questioning of it, i.e. where the children no longer honour their parent's authority but question and challenge it, with the end result being the negation of man having faith in God (the children no longer having faith in their Father's authority but rather in their own nature and the nature of all mankind, as in Genesis 3:1-6, 'liberating' themselves from the Father's, i.e. God's authority). After having children of his own, it is interesting to note that Abraham Maslow began to question the very process for which he is famous. "... my children got me into conflict with my theory." "I've been in continuous conflict over this Esalen-type, orgiastic, Dionysian-type education." "Who should teach whom [parent's their children or children their parents]?" (Abraham Maslow, Journals of Abraham Maslow) Parent's should take his warning to heart and rescue their children from the "Esalen-type, orgiastic, Dionysian-type education" Bloom's curriculum is giving them.
What Common Core (founded upon Bloom's Taxonomies) is all about is the cleansing of the Universities of the traditional professors of restraint. As Mao's cultural revolution, millions of youth are being sent from lower education in through their doors to overwhelm and remove the resisters of 'change,' thereby 'liberalizing' all professions which come out their doors. This was the concern of Phillip Jacob (traditional values remaining in all professionals, even after attending college, addressed in his book Changing Values in College) which (according to Bloom) set the Affective Domain book into motion. "Perhaps one of the most dramatic events highlighting the need for progress in the affective domain was the publication of Jacob's Changing Values in College (1957)." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 2 Affective Domain 1964) If you do not address Bloom's Taxonomies, i.e. their use in the classroom, i.e. used to negate the Father's authority in the thoughts and actions of the children, you have not addressed Common Core, i.e. the negation of the sovereignty of this nation in the thoughts and actions of its citizens.
The Word of God warns us: "And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable." "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:4-5, 12
What happens in the classroom does affect the home, the nation, and the world. "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God [the Father's authority], I will also forget thy children." Hosea 4:6 The old saying goes: "Who rocks the cradle, rules the world." Who is rocking your child's cradle, those using Bloom's Taxonomies on your child in the classroom or you, teaching your children to do right and not wrong, according to God's will?
By negating parental authority, the children have nothing to inherit, 'change agents' having gained control over it to entertain themselves with. George Hegel, sounding more like Karl Marx than Karl Marx himself, wrote: "On account of the absolute and natural oneness of the husband, the wife, and the child, ... the surplus is not the property of one of them ... all contracts regarding property or service and the like fall away ... the surplus, labour, and property are absolutely common to all, inherently and explicitly." (George Hegel, System of Ethical Life) In other words, your spouse, you children, your property, your business, and your very own life belongs to the "community" of immorality, i.e. subject to the world of abomination, i.e. subject to the facilitators of 'change.'. ''And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16: 15
"The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good. He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil." Psalms 36:1-4 "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes." Romans 3:10-18
"To whom shall I speak, and give warning, that they may hear? behold, their ear is uncircumcised, and they cannot hearken: behold, the word of the LORD is unto them a reproach; they have no delight in it. For from the least of them even unto the greatest of them every one is given to covetousness; and from the prophet even unto the priest every one dealeth falsely. They have healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace. Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore they shall fall among them that fall: at the time that I visit them they shall be cast down, saith the LORD." Jeremiah 6:10, 13-19 The only solution is to: "Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." Proverb. 3: 5-6
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2014
1. Abraham Maslow, known for his "Hierarchy of 'Felt' Needs" chronology, wrote: "History, almost universally, has dichotomized this higher & lower [God above man, the Father above the child directing his steps], but it is now clear that they are on the same continuum, in a hierarchical-integration of prepotency [the Father's authority, i.e. doing right and not wrong, verses the child's carnal nature, i.e. approaching pleasure and avoiding pain] & postpotency [the children of the world 'liberated' from the FA, being only of themselves, of "human nature" only, i.e. augmenting pleasure and attenuating pain being the only 'purpose' of life]." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow) Maslow's fellow socialist (Transformational Marxist), Carl Rogers wrote: "Individuals move not from a fixity through change to a new fixity, though such a process is indeed possible. But [through a] continuum from fixity to changingness, from rigid structure to flow, from status to process [from doing right and not wrong, according to some higher standard than human nature, to where pleasure and the augmentation of it becomes the only 'drive' and 'purpose' of life]." "In this process the individual becomes more open to his experience ['justifying' his carnal nature]. It is the opposite of defensiveness or rigidity [absolutes, i.e. doing the Father will in all things]. His beliefs are not rigid, he can tolerate ambiguity [deviancy, i.e. the depravity, i.e. his own as well as others—when/where we do not respond to depravity, i.e. deviancy, i.e. when we do not reprove, correct, or rebuke it, it (the procedure of embracing deviancy, i.e. immorality) becomes the "norm," the procedure by which we make our next decision regarding what is right and what is wrong]." "At one end of the continuum the individual avoids close relationships, which are perceived as being dangerous [for example as those who believe and do the following: "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 While we do live in the world we are not to be of it, i.e. making the approaching of pleasure and the avoiding of pain the 'drive' and 'purpose' of life. We are instead to do the will of our Heavenly Father, and His Son Jesus Christ in all things]. At the other end he lives openly and freely in relation to the therapist [the facilitator of 'change'] and to others [with the world], guiding his behavior on the basis of his immediate experiencing – he has become an integrated process of changingness [a child of the world only]."
Rather than grading the child according to his behavior, giving the right response (answer) and not the wrong to a particular question, Bloom grades the child according to his intentions, i.e. his internal feelings and thoughts and his external actions (whether they are in agreement or not). "What we are classifying is the intended behavior of students—the ways in which individuals are to act, think, or feel as the result of participating in some unit of instruction." "Educational procedures are intended to develop the more desirable rather than the more customary types of behavior." "The student must feel free to say he disliked _(fill in the blank)_ and not have to worry about being punished for his reaction." (Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 1 Cognitive Domain 1956)
The intended purpose of the Taxonomies is to negate the Father's authority in the thoughts and actions of the next generation of children, making them "adaptable to 'change.' "'Postmodernity ... describes a world where people have to make their way without fixed referents and traditional anchoring points. It is a world of rapid change, of bewildering instability.'" (Usher, Edwards, Estonia is postmodern) The scriptures warn us of such behavior and those who promote it (Jeremiah 5:21-31). "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him." Proverbs 22:15
What Bloom is missing in all of this is that repentant man has the love, joy, peace, etc. (longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, humbleness, self-restraint) of the Holy Spirit, which carnal man can not understand, i.e. not having repented of his sins (his disobedience) before God, not having been 'redeemed' from the wrath of the Father upon him for his sinful behavior, not having his sins covered by the blood of the lamb of God, i.e. Jesus Christ, who dying on the cross for his sins, saving him from eternal death, and therefore not being 'reconciled' to the Father by His resurrection from the grave, with the obedience of Jesus Christ to His Heavenly Father, i.e. righteousness being imputed to those of faith in Him, living by the law of faith rather than by the law of the flesh (lasciviousness, which is natural to man) or the law of God (legalism, which no man can satisfy, i.e. fulfill), the law of God being fulfilled in Christ, manifested to and through the believer by the work of the Holy Spirit, that no man may boast of "his works" before God. Philosophy is man's effort to resolve the conflict (the antithesis) between the law of the flesh (the nature of the child) and the law of God (the authority of the parent), with man "thinking" (the children "thinking"), i.e. reflecting, 'reasoning' "on how the world 'ought to be,'" which always coming out on the side of the law of the flesh (on the side of the child's nature).
2. Dialectic 'reasoning' claims this pattern (the Father's authority) in the home is what creates belief in God in the thoughts and actions of man. In his 'logic' the soul has no eternal value other than the legacy it leaves for man to follow, i.e. man becoming "good" only as he employs himself to the "good" or "betterment" of society. It is this 'logic' that 'justifies' abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, etc. i.e. 'justifying' the praxis of taking life for the same reason, i.e. for the "good" or "betterment" of society. The Marxist, Theodor Adorno wrote: "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "Authoritarian submission was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures—parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) Bloom used Adorno, as well as Erick Fromm6 as his ideologues (his Weltanschauung) in creating his Taxonomies. Without the classroom helping the child think and act according to his own "nature," which is common with all the children of the world, he will continue to reinforce his Father's authority instead of negating it.
According to dialectic 'reasoning,' because of the child's weakness in challenging his Father's authority, he initiates and sustains it instead, i.e. submitting to its will. "The life [authority] which he [the child] has given to the object [the Father] sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) It is up to the classroom to help him 'liberate' himself and society from his past errors (sins). "The answer to man's predicament lies in the realization by individual man, that all men are essentially one and that the one is God. This self-realization is a 'return' to union: potential becomes actual. Sin is the estrangement of man from man." (Leonard Wheat, Paul Tillich's Dialectical Humanism: Unmasking the God above God) Only by the child experiencing 'liberty' in the classroom experience (with his new found freedom to think and act outside of his Father's authority) can the child be 'liberated' from his Father's authority, and society eventually be freed from the influences of the Patriarchal Paradigm, i.e. belief in God, which divides man from man, i.e. the redeemed from the depraved, i.e. the saved from the lost, i.e. those made righteous in Christ, through faith, and those who remain unrighteous, living by sight, according to their carnal nature. Sin, instead of being the alienation of man from God is thus the alienation of man from man.
The only way to overcome "sin" (repression in the individual and alienation within society) in this case is to 'redeem' man from God (the Father's authority), "helping" him to 'reconcil' himself with his own carnal nature, finding identity and unity with his fellow man's carnal nature, via. the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus on personal-social-environmental issues and working together, i.e. as "one," in pleasure, in the 'moment,' negating the Father's authority, i.e. making the world a "better" place to live in. "In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of existence [in their carnal nature, i.e. in their desire to "enjoy," i.e. attain "pleasure" in, i.e. "lust" after the things of the world over and against the Father's commands which restrain them]. Therefore the dialectic of the moral life must repeat itself [until all are united as one in the "common ground" of their sinful nature, united as one in the ways of unrighteousness (which have become righteous in man's own eyes), i.e. 'liberated' from thinking and acting according to the Father's authority, i.e. no longer having to live according to His way of thinking and acting, i.e. doing right and not wrong according to His will]." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest) "What is particularly important here is that recognition of one's own individuality [apart from the parent's authority] is the basis for recognition of the individuality of everyone [apart from their parent's authority], and for the democratic concept of the dignity of man [children 'discovering' and 'actualizing' their "goodness" as they work together in harmony (thinking and acting according to their carnal nature) for the common-ist "good," negating the world of parental authority (under God)]." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
In this way, Bloom's (and Marzano's) classrooms can be seen as "deliverance ministries," "delivering" the children (and mankind) from any authority which tells them how they are to think and act, i.e. restraining their carnal, i.e. sinful nature. "This voice which really isn't you but tells you the way the world works is a direct attack on creativity. We have to work to remove it." (Michael Ray in Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Managment) "Only by bringing out the child's own ideas in dialogical and dialectical settings can the child begin to reconstruct and progressively transcend concepts [negate his parent's 'old fashioned' way of thinking and acting in his thoughts and actions]." (Richard Paul, Critical Thinking Handbook) "The school must make room for the deviant student." "This person [the child, i.e. the student] will be able to discriminate among values and to deviate from the moral status quo [their parent's authority]." "How such persons can be discovered, and, above all, how such persons can be produced in greater number is the major problem for research in character formation." (Robert Havighurst and Hilda Taba, Adolescent Character and Personality)
What is important to understand here is that the "guilty conscience"9 (which prevents or inhibits socialist 'change') comes from the Father's authority to give rules, commands, facts, and truth and then to chasten or cast out those who disobey or challenge his authority. It is the "guilty conscience" (the Father's voice within the child) that inhibits his nature to become at-one-with the world around him, preventing him from finding commonality (and therefore unity) with the diversity (deviancy) of the "community, i.e. preventing him from becoming at-one-with "the group," i.e. preventing him from being adaptable to 'change,' making him intolerant of ambiguity, i.e. of opinions, i.e. of theories. It is the tension (antithesis) between the Father's authority and the child's nature, as explained in Romans 7:14-25.
The dialectic idea being, by the children carrying their Father's rules, commands, facts, and truth into the "community" each family creates division (prejudice, i.e. tension) within the community, i.e. the children discriminating among one another prevent socialist harmony and worldly peace, i.e. global unity. By keeping the Father's authority in place, the only way "community" projects can be accomplished civilly is by majority vote and the secret ballot (to protect the conscience from socialist influences), using Roberts Rules of Order (with an honest chairman using them correctly, i.e. as they were intended), giving each citizen the right to preach and teach their position (their Father's, i.e. their teacher's rules, commands, facts, and truth), i.e. trying to persuade others that their position is the right one to take, preventing dialogue (which negates the Father's authority, i.e. which negates individualism), leaving the community divided (prejudiced) while still working on the project. By moving the classroom, workplace, government, church, etc. environment to the dialoging of opinions (to the consensus process) the "guilty conscience" is replace (seared) with the "super-ego," i.e. the individual's "feelings" and "thoughts" (his "thoughts" now taken captive to his "feelings" of the 'moment') taking the Father's authority captive to the experiential (sensual) social 'moment,' the Father's authority is negated in the individual's thoughts and actions, 'liberating' the child from the Father's authority, making him adaptable to 'change,' subject to socialist indoctrination. It is Blooms Affective Domain book that made this possible in the classroom.
Although dialogue and discussion are often swapped in usage. According to David Bohm (known for his work regarding quantum physics): "A Dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals." "A key difference between a dialogue and an ordinary discussion is that, within the latter [in a discussion] people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favour of their views as they try to convince others to change. At best this may produce agreement or compromise, but it does not give rise to anything creative [instead an either-or, above-below condition remains]." "The purpose of dialogue is to reveal the incoherence [that which is of faith] in our thought . . . [with all parties striving for] genuine and creative collective consciousness." "What is essential here [in the consensus process] is the presence of the spirit of dialogue, which is in short, the ability to hold many points of view in suspension, along with a primary interest in the creation of common meaning." (Bohm and Peat, Science, Order, and Creativity)
When the Father dialogues His opinion with his children, he must be willing to abdicate his position of authority for the 'moment,' i.e. both he and his children become "equal" in the 'moment.' "For to accept that solution [finding "common ground" through dialogue], even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [from the child's perspective] other than that of the bourgeoisie [rather than from the parent's position]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely." "... as soon as the bourgeoisie [the parent] is forced to take up its stand on this terrain [finding consensus, i.e. "equality" with the children through the dialoguing of opinions], it is lost." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?) The Father can not share his opinion, i.e. how he "feels" and what he "thinks," regarding how the children should behave, and then punish (chasten) them when they do not behave as He desired. He can only chasten the children when they disobey his commands. He can "discuss" the child's behavior with the child without stepping down from his office of authority.
When Bloom's Taxonomies are used on children in the classroom, getting them to "discuss issues" in the "light" of their "feelings" and their "thoughts," i.e. getting them to dialogue their opinions, they automatically exclude (negates) the Father's authority (the father's position) in the process. In the process the children learn that they can not 'rationally' defend "their position" (their Fathers rules, commands, facts, and truth which they have accepted as theirs). They soon comes to 'realize' that they can only share (dialogue) with one another how they "feel" and what they "think" (their opinion) regarding the Father's position, i.e. being able to share only that which is of themselves, i.e. that which is of nature only. "For one class to stand for the whole of society [the "have not's," the disenfranchised, i.e. the children], another must be the class of universal offense and the embodiment of universal limits [the "haves," the establishment, i.e. the parents]." "A particular social sphere [those who initiate and sustain "top-down" authority, i.e. parental authority which prejudes child with ridged belief, dividing the "community"] must stand for the notorious crime of the whole society, so that liberation from this sphere ['liberation' from the Patriarchal Paradigm] appears to be universal liberation." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right)
"Work done by Horkheimer [a Marxist, i.e. a member of the Frankfurt School] in the thirties identified 'neurosis [the child's inability to 'change' with the 'changing' times because of his holding to his Father's position] as a social product, . . . in which the family was seen as a primary agent of repressive socialization.'" (Stephen Erick Bronner, Of Critical Theory and its Theorists) "The family is one of these social forms which ... cannot be changed without change in the total social framework." (Max Horkheimer, Kritische Theori) This is why the next steps of Bloom's Taxonomies are of such importance to understand, i.e. focusing upon the child's feelings10 (dissatisfaction with the Father's authority which restrains "human nature," i.e. making his feelings subject to His Father's will, while desiring the approval of the Father while also desiring to do "as he wills," receiving the approval of the "group," which supports him) rather than the Father's rules, commands, facts, and truth (which divide the children of the community from one another). While ethnicity, economics, and environmental issues are focused upon, the real agenda is the negation of the Patriarchal Paradigm, i.e. belief in God. The agenda is not only to 'change' the children, i.e. helping them 'liberate' themselves from the Father's "top-down," "right-wrong" (prejudiced) way of thinking and acting, but also to 'change' the parents, i.e. turning them from a rigid right-wrong (prejudiced) way of think and acting to a "Can't we all just get along" way of thinking and acting. It "takes a village" to not only to raise the children but also to 'change' the parent's way of behaving toward their children as well as the rest of society. "Using social environmental forces to change the parent's behavior toward the child." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) Warren Bennis wrote: "Any intervention between parent and child tend to produce familial democracy [socialism] regardless of its intent." "The consequence of family democratization [liberalization of the children and the parents] take a long time to make themselves felt―but it would be difficult to reverse the process one begun." (Warren Bennis, Temporary Society) "The major implication was the transformation of the family's role in the process of socialization." (Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination)
While discrimination (prejudice) is presented as the reason for using Bloom's Taxonomies in the classroom (in an effort to end it), David Krathwohl, Bloom's partner in writing the second Taxonomy, i.e. the Affective Domain, wrote: "Success depends not upon complete absence of prejudice, but upon beneficial prejudices. The problem is one of determining what is 'beneficial prejudice' in any given instance." (David Krathwohl "The Myth of Value-Free Evaluation and Evaluator as Negotiations Facilitator-Fact Finder") While generalization of a person based upon their race or economics, i.e. labeling people as being "good" or "evil, i.e. of "worth" or "value" or not, based upon their physical features or financial condition is being narrow minded (prejudiced), to apply the same procedure to all facets of life negates the Father's authority to teach his children (as God teaches man) what is "good" and what is "evil" behavior. In the end it is not just a race issue but a sin issue as well. The sin being not only man's wicked behavior (and thoughts) toward his fellow man (the last six commandments) but his wicked behavior and thoughts toward God as well (the first four commandments). Social 'change,' based upon the elimination of the Father's authority, i.e. prejudice against right-wrong thinking and acting, can only result in a society of abomination, i.e. the next generation thinking and acting with no Godly restraint.
Ralph Tyler, who Bloom dedicated his first Taxonomy too, advocated dialectic prejudice, i.e. "democratic ethics," i.e. "democratic prejudice": "The ethical issue is: How much can society spend, if it has limited resources, on keeping some person of age 65 alive for ten years at a cost that would cover the health services to children for perhaps 20 or 30 times that many children?" (Ralph Tyler, An Interview with Ralph Tyler Conducted by: Jeri Ridings Nowakowski, Ed.D. November 1981) What affect does this kind of thinking (age discrimination) have upon those professions which are dedicated to taking "care" of you, especially when you get up in years and/or don't think and behave the "right" way, i.e. according to the "right" paradigm, i.e. according to dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. no longer being able to support socialism, i.e. now getting in its way, i.e. costing it money. Like socialists, i.e. children (in adult bodies) the next generation will "love" you and tend to your needs as long as you have money or the time to give them for their pleasures, i.e. satisfy (attend to) their carnal "felt" needs of the 'moment' and/or have the potential of attending to (satisfying) their carnal, "felt" needs of the future. In other words, "care" receiver be aware (discerning). Your life might depend upon it.
While dialectic revolutions kill(ed) the king's authority over the citizens, i.e. negated the Father's authority over the children, the American Revolution retained the king ("top-down" authority). Not in the Federal, State, county, township, city governments, but in the home (where the conscience is developed). Our framing Fathers limited all governments by dividing the branches, leaving the Father alone to make the laws for his home, carry out his agenda, and judge (chasten or cast out) his children when they disobeyed or challenged His authority, engendering private rights (inalienable rights), private meaning "My children. Not yours." "My property, Not yours." My business, Not yours."
In this way all representatives are as children, sent to the store to represent (re-present) their parents' (their constituents') position as they buy the goods they were sent to purchase (with the parent's money). If they spent the money on themselves or on other things not of the parent's desires they were not sent back to the store again until they learned to obey. All this had to be negated if socialism was to prevail (gain access to the parent's money, i.e. gain control over the Father's children, His property, and His business). By the use of the consensus process the socialists now control the children who have their parents' credit cards, spending (taxing) them into debt as they promote their socialist ways. There is no true representation in the consensus process, only children (in adult bodies), united as one, doing what they "feel like doing" in the 'moment,' working together for the common-ist cause. "Bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making, our objective centers upon .... transform[ing] public opinion into an effective instrument of global politics." "Individual values must be measured by their contribution to common interests and ultimately to world interests.... transforming public consensus into one favorable to the emergence of a stable and humanistic world order." "Consensus is both a personal and a political step. It is a precondition of all future steps..." (Ervin Laszlo, A Strategy for the Future: The Systems Approach to World Order)
3. Bloom admited in his Affective Domain book that "the levels of the Taxonomy should describe successive levels of goal setting appropriate to super-ego11 development [from parent consciousness to cosmic consciousness]." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 2 Affective Domain 1964) As the children progressively incorporate their "feelings" into the making of moral decisions, the difference between their parent's standards and the group's standards can be evaluated through testing instruments, revealing the 'change' that has taking place over time (why testing is so important and "private"12, i.e. preventing parents, and even local educators, from viewing them). Bloom writes: "In the more traditional society [based upon parental authority] a philosophy of life, a mode of conduct, is spelled out for its members at an early stage in their lives. A major function of education in such a society is to achieve the internalization of this philosophy [holding the children to right-wrong thinking and acting, with right and wrong being established for the children by an authority figure, the children therefore sustaining this way of thinking and acting for the rest of their life, passing it on to their children]." "This is not to suggest that education in an open society [in a transformational, i.e. socialist society] does not attempt to develop personal and social values. It does indeed. But more than in traditional societies it allows the individual a greater amount of freedom [of "feelings" and "thought"] in which to achieve a Weltanschauung." ibid. In the footnote for the word "Weltanschauung" Bloom referenced two Marxists (Transformational Marxists) as reflecting his world view or paradigm, i.e. his way of thinking and acting. They were Theodor Adorno and Erich Fromm (two members of the Frankfurt School, a group of Marxists who synthesized Sigmund Freud, i.e. psychology with Marx, i.e. sociology, and visa versa, who came to America from Frankfurt, Germany in the early 30's when Hitler became Germany's Chancellor).
Bloom admitted in the footnote that socialism (Transformational Marxism) did not come naturally or easily to the children and therefore they needed assistance from facilitators of 'change,' i.e. "educators" if they were to avoid becoming a-social or anti-socialists. "Often this is too challenging a goal for the individual to achieve on his own, and the net effect is either maladjustment or the embracing of a philosophy of life developed by others." ibid. While admitting that "One's beliefs, attitudes, values , and personality characteristics are more likely to be regarded as private matters," Bloom makes it clear what his intent for developing the Taxonomy was, i.e. the negation of the paradigm of the traditional society, defining that which he wanted to negate: "My attitudes toward God, home and family are private concerns." If you want to 'change' people and society, you have to know what you want to 'change' it from (from private concerns) as well as what you want to 'change' it into (to public concerns). "The public-private status of cognitive vs. affective behaviors [the child's "feelings" made subject to the parents authority via chastening] is deeply rooted in the Judaeo-Christian religion and is a value highly cherished in the democratic traditions of the Western world [traditional democracy]. Closely linked to this private aspect of affective behavior is the distinction frequently made between education and indoctrination in a democratic society." The point being: in a "democratic society" (since the 30's infiltrated with Transformational Marxists ideology), parental authority does not establish the standards from which the child is to think and act, but rather allows the child freedom to apply his "feelings" in making decisions regarding what is right and what is wrong behavior, allowing the situation to help him determine right behavior.
The facilitator of 'change' or 'change agent' has only one duty, that of 'changing' a persons paradigm from parental authority to global socialism (from a Patriarchal Paradigm of absolutes to a Heresiarchal Paradigm of 'changingness'). It is therefore essential that he knows not only how to identify a person's "attitudes, values and behaviors" but also knows how to 'change' them. A "change agent... should know about the process of change, how it takes place and the attitudes, values and behaviors that usually act as barriers.... He should know who in his system are the 'defenders' or resisters of innovations ["innovation" means 'change']." (Ronald Havelock, A Change Agent's Guide to Innovation in Education) "Before effective plans for change can be made the present state of affairs must be defined as accurately as possible." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) Thus the need for a "Taxonomy." Without it the outcome would be unpredictable. Thus Bloom in Book 1 (the Cognitive Domain) stated: "The psychological relationships employed by the classification scheme are suggestive of psychological investigations." "The taxonomy should be consistent with relevant and accepted psychological principles and theories." Those "relevant and accepted psychological principles and theories," i.e. identified in the second "Taxonomy" (the Affective Domain), were developed by members of the "Frankfurt School" (The Institute of Social Research) along with Kurt Lewin who (along with Wilhelm Reich) edited their papers.
Since the 30's America has been infiltrated with Transformational Marxist ideology ('change agents,' i.e. social-psychologists synthesizing Marx and Freud synthesized) creating a "democratic society," i.e. a public-private partnership promoting the idea that that which is private (a person's feelings toward something or someone, pro or con) must become public domain (subject to socio-psychological evaluation). The question is: If that which is private is nobodies business. And that which is public is everybody's business. Then in a public-private partnership, where that which is "private" becomes everybody's (i.e. the social-psychologist's) business, is not private negated? Whoever has access to a persons "feelings" can control, i.e. seduce, deceive, and manipulate, i.e. market, i.e. buy and sell him, using him to their end, without his knowledge. The next question is: Are we really this stupid? This issue is: If parental authority is no longer the establisher of standards from which the child is to think and act, but rather the child is free to apply his "feelings" in making decisions regarding what is right and what is wrong behavior, is he not allowing the immediate situation, i.e. the current environment (and therefore those in control of it, i.e. manipulating it) "help" him (seduce, deceive, and manipulate him) into determining the "right" behavior for their desired outcome, i.e. with their providing him with the "appropriate information" (environmental conditions) guaranteeing their desired outcome.
I do not think you woke up this morning saying: "I hope somebody manipulates me today, getting me to do what they want without me knowing." If you think it through, if iron ore could think like man and decided that it did not want to be manipulated (changed into iron or steel, etc.) but remain as it is, iron ore, then it would be considered worthless. The same is true for you if you consider yourself "human resource." If you refuse to be manipulatable ('changeable'), you are worthless.
While didactic-deductive reasoning allows a person privacy regarding his "feelings," i.e. he might not like doing what he is told to do, i.e. he would rather be doing something else, but he does it anyway (as long as it does not go against his conscience), dialectic-inductive 'reasoning' does not allow him the "freedom" to keep his "feelings" private, pressuring him instead to make that which is private public. In other words he had better "like" what he is being "encouraged" (pressured, i.e. manipulated) to do (by the group, i.e. with the facilitator of 'change' determining the options in dealing with the situation) or he will not be approved by "the group" (he will not be hired or promoted because he is not a "team player"). "The group" will not get a "good" grade because they are not able to overcome (negate) his 'resistance to 'change,' i.e. manipulate him, i.e. get him to "feel" good towards the "group process," i.e. be a "team player." His refusal to share his "feelings" with the group, having "feelings" which are not directed toward group harmony, i.e. not in harmony with group activities, or having feelings "hostile" towards "the group" reveals his "feelings" toward social-ism, i.e. toward common-ism. Without him revealing his "feelings" (pro or con) he can not be graded ("helped"), i.e. his grade (his health, i.e. mental and social) depending upon where along the spectrum of 'change' (pro or con) he resides in the 'moment.' The objective of the "group grade" is "'to expose the patient [the student], under more favorable circumstances, to emotional situations which he could not handle in the past [when he was too weak or "cowardly" to question, challenge, attack, and annihilate the patriarchal paradigm. The classroom environment is designed to help the student] undergo a corrective emotional experience suitable to repair the traumatic influence of previous experience.' [he can now connect his emotions to social causes instead of having them restrained by and subjugated to parental authority]." (Franz Alexander as quoted in Irvine Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy) By "the group" giving or removing emotional support toward the student, depending upon his behavior toward the "group process," he can be pressured (manipulated) into conceding ("confessing") to "the group" (sharing his "feelings") to regain their emotional support (making him 'rational,' i.e. 'reasonable'). As Carl Roger's admitted: "We know how to influence the ... behavior of individuals by setting up conditions which provide satisfaction for needs of which they are unconscious, but which we have been able to determine." "…our potential ability to influence or control the behavior of groups. If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
While traditional society (a "closed society") tells a child how he is to "feel," "think," and "act" (what Bloom calls "indoctrination"), in an "open society" (a transformational society) the child's feelings become a part of (help him in) his thinking and acting (what Bloom calls "education"). The deception here is that whether you want to call it indoctrination or education what Bloom is doing is not education or indoctrination but actually re-education or re-indoctrination (both going hand in hand), making a person's "feelings" a part of the public domain, i.e. negating private. "Perhaps a reopening of the entire question [whether "feelings," i.e. the current situation should or should not determine what is right behavior or wrong behavior] would help us to see more clearly the boundaries between education and indoctrination, and the simple dichotomy expressed above between cognitive and affective behavior [between established right and wrong vs. the "feelings" of the 'moment'] would no longer seem as real as the rather glib separation of the two suggests." Therefore the task of the "educator" (and test creator and examiner) is to grade the level (or spectrum or continuum) of emotion the child has for his parent's standards, which he has accepted as his, i.e. seeking the approval of the parents vs. the level of emotion the child has for "the group's" standards of the 'moment,' i.e. ever 'changing' according to the 'changing' situation, which he has accepting as his, i.e. seeking the approval of "the group."
Bloom wrote: in "ordering and relating the different kinds of affective behavior .... we need to provide the range of emotion from neutrality through mild to strong emotion, probably of a positive [where the group's approval is stronger, i.e. more important to the student, than the parent's approval, engendering liberalism, i.e. socialism i.e. parental disapproval,], but possibly also of a negative kind [where the parent's approval is stronger, i.e. more important to the student than the group's approval, engendering conservatism, i.e. individualism (under God), i.e. group disapproval,]," with all of this "organized into value systems and philosophies of life." (Remember, taxonomy means to classify: every child in the classroom is being classified or mapped and graded or assessed, i.e. rewarded or punished, according to where along this spectrum of 'change' he resides in the 'moment.') As Theodor Adorno admitted, and Bloom carried out in the classroom, the objective was, through the use of psychology (the child's opinion) and sociology (the groups approval), to 'change' the individual, i.e. the student's way of thinking and acting and therefore society: ". . . as the present study has shown, we are dealing with a structure within the person it seems that we should consider, first, psychological techniques for changing personality." ""The problem is one which requires the efforts of all social scientists." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)
As a side note, regarding "the problem," according to Adorno (and Bloom), in the process of 'changing' the child's "personality" from a traditional (parental authority, i.e. locally controlled) mindset to a transformation (socialist-globalist-environmentalist, i.e. Internationally control) mindset, which required taking him through a transitional (individualistic) mindset, during the transition period, while the child is being separated (divorced) from parental authority, i.e. being introduced to socialism (whether national or global both negate the Father's authority), if he should fall back to a "top-down" authority structure again (along with his parent's, i.e. defending their authority by turning to the state or nation for help) would he (and they) initiate and sustain national socialism, i.e. Fascism (Nazism). "What The Authoritarian Personality was really studying was the character type of a totalitarian rather than an authoritarian society―fostered by a familial crisis in which traditional parental authority was under fire." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) The issue was how to get the children (and the parents and "community") through transition without loosing them to Nationalism (Fascism). The key was the child's classroom experience, i.e. 'changing' his personality, and the testing procedure, i.e. to keep track of not only the child's progress but also his teacher's and his school's progress (keeping it from returning to local control or turning to national socialism). The "Objectives" of the "Taxonomy" was to keep track of the child's progress from the traditional mindset (parental authority), through the transitional mindset (individualism, where the child is 'liberated' from parental authority being introduced to socialism), to the transformational (global socialism) mindset without losing the child (and society) to isolationism or national socialism. The "Strongly agree, Agree, Mostly agree, Disagree, Mostly disagree, Strongly disagree, and Do not know" type questions aided in identifying where along the spectrum of 'change' the student resided in the 'moment.'
Back to point: while traditionally minded parents might consider this a "good" thing, i.e. that their child's personality is being 'changed' for the better in their classroom experience, i.e. thinking that "education" entailed the learning of respect for authority, they did not realize that "better" meant negating their authority, i.e. replacing their right-wrong way of thinking and acting ("structure" of thought) in their children's thoughts and actions with socialism. Only this time to prevent national socialism, the "group grade" (along with "state assessment tests") keep track of the students, the teachers, and the schools (and the "community," including the citizens), making sure they are successfully moving through transitional to transformational objectives, i.e. not becoming lost along the way.
The classroom environment, instead of focusing upon the children learning facts and truth, is instead focused upon 'changing' the child's paradigm, i.e. 'changing' his way of feeling, thinking, and acting, without parental knowledge or clear understanding of what Bloom meant by the word "education." If Bloom had given the parents the option to decide whether they wanted their children to be educated in honoring and respecting the parent's office of authority or to be re-educated in treating it as "irrational" and therefore "irrelevant," this would simply be an act of freedom, with the parents choosing between the two. But, instead Bloom maked the classroom an institution, i.e. a laboratory of 'change,' i.e. turning the children into socialists (globalists) without informing the parents of his intended 'purpose,' with their tax dollars and support helping him along the way. This is called treachery.
Kenneth Benne, the author of Human Relations in Curriculum Change, a precursor to Bloom's works, shared the attitude which the "educational establishment," under Bloom's supervision had (and still have). "If the school [under sociolo-psychological control of Bloom's Taxonomies] does not claim the authority to distinguish between science and religion [between humanism, i.e. sociological and psychological science, i.e. 'liberating the child's nature from parental authority], it loses control of the curriculum and surrenders it to the will of the electorate [to the local control of the parents]." (Kenneth Benne, Society as Educator in an Age of Transition )
After all, the two books, i.e. the Cognitive and Affective Domain books, i.e. books 1 and 2, are called "Taxonomy of Education Objectives," the "objective" being the identification of the Father's authority (parental authority) in the child's thoughts and actions (how strong or weak the child's loyalty to it is) with the intent of 'changing' it, i.e. negating it, to where the child's thoughts and actions are only 'loyal' to socialism-globalism-environmentalism. Whether it is or was a "Taxonomy" or not Bloom admitted that he did not know, commenting some 40 years after publishing the Cognitive Domain, Book 1 that "the theory behind it was unproven at the time, and may well be unprovable," i.e. of course theories are unproven or they would not be called theories. (Benjamin Bloom, 40 Year Retrospect) The objective was and still is: how to test and grade the children (reward or punish them) based upon their "feelings," i.e. based upon their loyalty toward their parents (the Father' authority, i.e. supporting private property, business, and nationalism with their time, i.e. feelings, thoughts, and actions, and money) or the group (socialism, i.e. supporting "public-private partnership," i.e. globalism with their time, i.e. feelings, thoughts, and actions, and money) along a spectrum or continuum of extreme conservatives to extreme liberalism, and their ability to defend ('justify') their reasoning behind it, i.e. their ability to use dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. "higher order thinking skills," i.e. self-social-environmental 'justification' in doing so.
As mentioned above, if local test creators designed and examined the tests, local control, i.e. traditional values would prevail and society would remain divided. For socialism (globalism) to become 'reality' a common language (a means of communication) would have to pervade all educational institutions, local, state, national, and international. The testing procedure provides such a format. Bloom wrote in Book 1: "a means of insuring accuracy of communication...." "The major purpose ... is to facilitate communication.... a method of improving the exchanging of ideas and materials among test workers ... to understand more completely the relation between the learning experiences provided by these various programs and the changes which take place in their students." The "communication" between "test workers" would not necessarily be on the subject matter itself but on the procedure which was being used in selecting and using it (where along the spectrum of' 'change' the student is, which determines what information is selected and used, i.e. keeping all classes, of all ages and all professions on the same page, i.e. regarding their progress along the spectrum of 'change,' without the subject matter getting in the way). What is being graded ("classified") is the "intended pupil behaviors." The student's response to the test questions (i.e. his social-psychological evaluation, i.e. his "social and emotional adjustment") reveals his classroom experience, i.e. how the teacher taught him and how effective they were in doing so, i.e. his classroom environment and how effective it was in 'changing' him, affectively, i.e. "it appears that as the behaviors become more complex [the student begins to question authorities that restrain his "feelings"], the individual is more aware of their existence [becomes more aligned with his "feelings" and the world around him that affects them "positively"]." Therefore it is essential that pre tests (revealing the students "prior educational experiences") and post tests be administered to the "examinees'" (students), in order to evaluate the progress in 'change' (of paradigms) they are or are not making. "One of the major problems in the classification of test items which this study revealed is that it is necessary in all cases to know or assume the nature of the examinees' prior educational experiences." In other words, all student's must be tracked and psychological portfolios be kept on them by the test creators and examiners, tracking their progress from where they came from to where they are now (if they fall back they more than likely will return to their old "top-down" ways but with the socialist influences they learned along the way, they more than likely will turn to national socialists or else become anarchists "without a cause"). "Life long learning" means "life long evaluation" regarding how you are feeling, thinking and acting in the 'moment,' making sure you don't slip back into the "old" (traditional) way of doing things and become a problem to the "new" world order.
The agenda is to 'create' a society that will 'labor' (collectively) for the kingdom of man, rather than the kingdom of God. Follow the money trail. It is what Common Core is doing, i.e. developing psychological portfolios on all children, tracking them to see where they will spend their money, their time, and their effort, i.e. spending it on their family, their property, their business, i.e. supporting their parents' way of thinking and acting, i.e. supporting the system which sustains them in their personal interest (capitalism), or on the "betterment" of the "community," i.e. society (capitalism-socialism/common-ism). It is what BSTEP (Behavior Science in Teacher Education Program), the first Federal Grant on Education (1969) was all about (explaining how to track the students and keep psychological portfolios on them, with a feasibility study on where this nation and the world would be by the years 1984, 2000, and 2100 if the procedure, i.e. Bloom's Taxonomies, was applied properly).
As in The Brothers Karamazov, where the sons kill their father (God) for his kingdom (land and money), the children, under the use of Bloom's Taxonomies are being indoctrinated ("educated") to do the same, i.e. negating the Father's (God's) authority in their thoughts and actions, making the Lord's earth ("the earth is the Lords and the fulness thereof") their earth ("the fruits of the earth belong to us all [with the facilitators of 'change' who are in control, making sure they get their "fair" share, leading the way], and the earth itself to nobody [negating the Father's right to say "My children," "My property," "My business," etc.]." Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality). "We are working not with Thee [the Lord] but with him [Satan]... We took from him what Thou didst reject with scorn, that last gift he offered Thee, showing Thee all the kingdoms of the earth. We took from him Rome and the sword of Caesar, and proclaimed ourselves sole rulers of the earth... We shall triumph and shall be Caesars, and then we shall plan the universal happiness of man." (Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov) Is it no wonder that Normal O. Brown wrote of Freud (Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History): "To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit;" where the two children in the garden said in essence "God's tree is our tree," like Karl Marx saying "The kings horse is the peoples horse." (Karl Marx, The Holy Family) As Satan offering Jesus the kingdoms of the world, i.e. all that is of the world, if he would but bow down and worship him, making him, the master facilitator of 'change' the "creator" of all things, so Bloom assists children in doing the same, making all the kingdom's of the world one, thinking and acting according to their carnal nature, becoming "children of disobedience."
"Marx defines the essence of man as labor and traces the dialectic of labor in history till labor [having to do what someone else says without getting immediate gratification out of for themselves] abolishes itself [so much for Jesus enduring the shame and pain of the cross for our salvation, i.e. for the joy that lay ahead]." "Freud suggests that beyond labor at the end of history is love [Eros, the carnal pleasures which are engendered from the gratifying, i.e. deviant experiences which are orchestrated by the "Human Resource" department in the workplace]." "Love [the nature of the child, his love for the things of the world, which all children have in common, i.e. common-ism] has always been there from the beginning . . . the hidden force [the child's dissatisfaction with having to do what he is "told" to do when he does not want to do it] supplying the energy devoted to labor and to making history." "Repressed Eros [man's (the child's) dissatisfaction with having to work for (obey) someone else without getting pleasure from it for himself in the 'moment'] is the energy of history and labor must be seen as sublimated Eros." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
The objective of Bloom's taxonomies was to bring Eros, i.e. the child's carnal nature, i.e. his "feelings" and "thoughts," i.e. his Affective Domain, i.e. his opinions and behavior into the workplace, making pleasure a required part of 'labor,' i.e. especially the "pleasure" of being a "team player," conditioning the child to "think" and "act" in the workplace of a future society, a socialist workplace of "We working for us," i.e. 'liberated' from "top-down" authority. "Work is not about paying the rent anymore--it is about self-fulfillment [the difference between children and adults, i.e. boys and men is that children buy toys to play with while men buy land to work]." "In a democratic society a patriarchal culture should make us depressed instead of glad; it is an argument against the higher possibilities of human nature, of self actualization." "In our democratic society, any enterprise--any individual--has its obligations to the whole." "Tax credits would be given to the company that helps to improve the whole society, and helps to improve the democracy by helping to create democratic individuals [honors will be given to the students who help improve "group harmony and group output"]." "The goals of democratic education can be nothing else but development toward psychological health [the so called "National Health Care Package" has this as its 'purpose,' i.e. it is not just physical health, it is also mental and social health as well, with socialist health being the 'drive' and the 'purpose' for them all]." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management) "The revolution that must occur is the reaction of suppressed life, which will visit the causality of fate upon the rulers [the parents, the landowners, the employers, etc.]." "Therefore the dialectic of the moral life must repeat itself until the materialist spell that is cast upon the reproduction of social life, the Biblical curse of necessary labor, is broken technologically." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest)
"Events of early childhood are of prime importance for the happiness and work-potential of the adult." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) Read Adorno's statement again, if you missed it, i.e. if we want the future workers of the world to unite as one in the workplace, in a world freed of parental authority, we have to start with your child in the classroom, or better yet even before he gets there. "Salvation Is a By-Product of Self-Actualizing Work and Self-Actualizing Duty." "In self-actualizing people, the work they do might be better be called 'mission,' 'calling,' 'duty,' 'vocation,' in the priest's sense." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management) This all sounds like some intellectuals mumbo jumbo until it manifests itself before your eyes, forcing you to participate in its ways, taking that which is yours (your liberties, i.e. your inalienable rights, under God) and using it for itself, i.e. for "human rights," i.e. for the "new" world order of collectivism, i.e. buying and selling souls, creating a "good" society.
Just note this: history has shown that while the Father, i.e. king, boss, parent, etc., only wants to rule over that which is "his," i.e. a part of the world, casting out those who refuse to cooperate, socialists, who want to control the whole world must negate (silence or kill) those who refuse to cooperate. They can not cast them out, allowing them to have a "kingdom" of their own, lest they gain favor with the people, grow back into power and prevent global dominance, i.e. governance. The process is not successful until no one can escape. In other words, according to Hegel, "it is necessary that the citizen cannot continually think of emigrating but that the class of cultivators, no longer able to push to the outside, presses upon itself and is gathered into cities and urban professions." (Carl Friedrich, The Philosophy of Hegel)
Following the 'logic' of the Affective Domain (which correlates to the Cognitive Domain) we now know the grading system is along the spectrum or continuum of whether the child is "Receiving," i.e. "attending to" the commands, rules, facts, and truth of the parent, i.e. for parental approval, or is "Receiving," i.e. "attending to" the commands, rules, facts, and "truth" of "the group," i.e. for "group approval." Is he then "Responding" in favor of "parental approval," i.e. doing what he is told to do, or "group approval," i.e. beginning to think and act according to his "feelings" of the 'moment.' Is he then "Valuing" working with the parents, i.e. doing what they want him to do, valuing and supporting their way of thinking and acting, or is he "Valuing" working with "the group," i.e. doing what he "wants" to do as long as it does not hinder but contributes to the advancement of "group building" and the "group's task" at hand ("The specific goal is not an achievement goal per se but is rather a socialization goal which must be reached before the achievement goal can be adequately facilitated." Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change). Is he then grasping the "Organization" of parental authority, assisting in the promotion of it or is he grasping the "Organization" of socialism, assisting in the promotion of it. And finally does his "Character," i.e. his values reflect his 'drive' and 'purpose' in initiating and sustaining parental authority wherever he goes or does it reflect his 'drive' and 'purpose' in initiating and sustaining socialism wherever he goes. In the former, response is directed by the Father's authority while in the latter it is determined by the information, i.e. stimulation from the immediate environment, i.e. both from within the child and from without the child, both in concord with nature.
With 'reasoning' now taken captive to the "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e. to the situation, i.e. to the crisis of the 'moment,' children are no longer thinking and acting according to the commands, rules, facts, or truth of their parents (or God), they no longer have a "guilty conscience" for doing "wrong" since "wrong" is now situational, with self-social-environmental 'justification' now being the name of the game. They have instead embraced socialism, globalism, environmentalism, "humanist rights," public-private partnership as the right way of thinking and acting, making individualism, nationalism, inalienable rights, private vs. public (all under God) the wrong way to think and act. In this case "the ends 'justify' the means." It is why treachery, i.e. not informing, i.e. not sharing honesty and openly with (making "transparent" to) the parents the intended 'purpose' of the Taxonomies was not done in the beginning and is not even being done today. Those promoting the use of the Taxonomies (using "higher order thinking skills" on morals and ethics in the classroom) know that parents would (more than likely) not approve of (nor cooperate with, i.e. would likely resist and/or fight against) the negation of their authority over their children, even if it is being done for the cause of a "new" world order—where children (and parents) are seduced, deceived, and manipulated by facilitators of 'change' for the 'purpose' of creating socialist harmony and worldly peace. "If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever." 1 John 2:16-18
Every facilitator of 'change' is evaluating (mapping) the children in the classroom, the worker in the workplace, the elected representative in the government, the citizens in the town hall meeting, the members of the church, i.e. evaluating (mapping) everyone's conversation and actions according to where the are at the 'moment' along this spectrum of 'change.' It is what being "certified" as a teacher, "accredited" as a school is all about these days, i.e. applying Blooms' Taxonomies to yourself and your students in classroom for the 'purpose' of 'change,' i.e. negating the Father's authority in the students thoughts and actions so they can be themselves, i.e. "human," i.e. as they were before their Father's first command and threat of chastening for disobedience.
According to Kenneth Benne everyone going through the "group think" process of 'change' must go through four stages: 1. "In the first phase various members of the group quickly attempt to establish their customary places in the leadership hierarchy [maintain a parental "top-down" way of thinking and acting]." 2. "Next comes a period of frustration and conflict brought about by the leader's steadfast rejection of the concept of peck order and the authoritarian atmosphere in which the concept of peck order is rooted." 3. "The third phase sees the development of cohesiveness among the members of the group, accompanied by a certain amount of complacency and smugness [self-righteousness]." 4. "In the fourth phase the members retain the group-centeredness and sensitivities which characterized the third phase, but they develop also a sense of purpose and urgency which makes the group potentially an effective social instrument." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
4. This follows in line with "Enlightenment," i.e. man 'liberating' himself from Godly restraint (children 'liberating' themselves from parental authority). "The ideas of the Enlightenment taught man that he could trust his own reason as a guide to establishing valid ethical norms and that he could rely on himself, needing neither revelation [the Father's will revealed] nor that authority of the church [Jesus Christ, i.e. calling all to obedience to His Father's will] in order to know good and evil." (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists)
5. School officials used to be concerned about gum under the desk. Today they are concerned about guns being used in the classroom, i.e. students shooting students, teachers, the school staff, and the general public. It is because we have 'changed' education from the Father's authority to the ideology of Karl Marx that laws must be ever-changing, i.e. subject to the impulses and urges of the students and the social 'moment.' "Laws must not fetter human life; but yield to it; they must change as the needs and capacities of the people change." (Karl Marx Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right ed. Joseph O'Malley) "Jurisprudence of terror takes two forms; loosely defined rules which produces unpredictable law, and spontaneous changes in rules to best suit the state." (R. W. Makepeace and Croom Helm, Marxist Ideology and Soviet Criminal Law) By coming to the point where children (students) set policy instead of the parents, now government, i.e. Presidents, Judges, as well as National, State, and local legislative bodies, through the consensus process, can set policy according to the "whims" of the times, all in an effort to satisfy the impulses and urges of the 'changing' times, negating the parent's authority to "repress" their children, oppressing the parents instead13. The solution is not to have police officers roaming the halls of the school or putting guns in the teachers hands but putting the paddle (the fear of God) back in the classroom, but the "new' world order (with the children ruling) will not and can not have that.
Will C. Wood, Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of California, in 1920, remarked about the affect education would have on this nation if the children began to set policy: "No school worthy of the name can exist unless the principle of respect for authority is observed. No school can exist without discipline, without subordination of pupils to reasonable rules and regulations. Anarchy in school means anarchy in the nation later on." "Has authority been banished in these later days? Is there still such a thing as discipline? Has the world reached a point where it will condone the formation of pupil soviets?" (California Blue Bulletin, 1920) A "pupil soviet" is: "a diverse group of students (along the spectrum from traditional through transitional to transformational in thought and action), dialoguing their opinions to a consensus, (there is no Father's authority in the dialoging of opinions, which puts the traditional students into a state of cognitive dissonance), over social issues (focusing on local-national-international-environmental crisis), in a facilitated meeting (it will not work without a facilitator of 'change' keeping it "on track," i.e. from "derailing," i.e. from going back to the Father's authority), to a pre-determined outcome" that not decision is to be made without the use of the soviet system, which is being learned by the students in the "group grade" Common Core classroom. "The institutions in socialist society which act as the facilitators between the public and private realms [between "the group" or "community" and the student or individual] are the Soviets." (György Lukács, Process of Democratization ed. by Norman Levine) While parents may not recognize the soviet system, teachers do, having to apply it in their classroom through their curriculum, i.e. through their use of Blooms' Taxonomies, negating the Father's authority in their students thoughts and actions, 'liberating' them for socially useful work, rebuilding the "tower of babel," i.e. "We working for Us," i.e. united as "one," as "community" (common-unity), "making a name for ourselves."
Patrick Henry warned us of the dangers of the Constitution itself, at the time it did not have the "Bill of Rights," i.e. the right of the citizens to defend themselves from a government of tyranny (the right to bear arms—for tyranny lies in the heart of man), i.e. the right of the parents to defend themselves from a child of tyranny (the right to chasten and cast out—for tyranny lies in the heart of the child). He wrote: "Can the annals of mankind exhibit one single example, where rulers overcharged with power, willingly let go the oppressed, though solicited and requested most earnestly?" "A willing relinquishment of power is one of those things which human nature never was, nor ever will be capable of:" "Shew me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss of liberty?" "This, Sir, is my great objection to the Constitution, that there is no true responsibility – and that the preservation of our liberty depends on the single chance of men being virtuous enough to make laws to punish themselves." "The Senate can, with the President [and now Judges which was unthinkable in Patrick Henry's time], make treaties, that shall be the supreme law of the land: They may make the most ruinous treaties; and yet there is no punishment for them." (Patrick Henry June 5 and 7, 1788―1788-1789 Petersburg, Virginia edition of the Debates and other Proceedings . . . Of the Virginia Convention of 1788)
6. "In the process of history man gives birth to himself [delivers, i.e. 'liberates' himself from God, i.e. from the Father's authority]. He becomes what he potentially is [of his own flesh only], and he attains what the serpent [the master facilitator of 'change']—the symbol of wisdom and rebellion—promised, and what the patriarchal, jealous God of Adam did not wish: that man would become like God himself [evaluating himself and the world around him according to his own carnal nature. Man, not being God, i.e. righteous in and of Himself, can only evaluate himself and the world around him according to his own carnal nature making himself subject only to his flesh, the world, and "the prince of the power of the air" (Ephesians 2:2), perceiving himself "as God," 'righteous' in his own eyes, i.e. thinking and acting according to his flesh only, therefore leaving himself dead in his sins]." (Erich Fromm, You Shall Be As Gods)
It is not in our nature to worship who created us but rather to worship who feeds our flesh. Children, by nature, do not concern themselves with were they will spend eternity, i.e. the soul, i.e. the "there-and-then," but rather the satisfaction of their "felt" needs of the 'moment,' i.e. the flesh, i.e. the "here-and-now." For the child, the eternity of the pleasures of the 'moment,' i.e. of the present, supersedes the eternity of the future. Focus upon their "felt" needs of the 'moment,' the pleasures of this life, and you "own" them, i.e. have their attention. Apart from the Father (Receiving and Responding to the "here-and-now" and "there-and-then" consequences for our behavior) we are simply children seeking after the gratifying things of the world, i.e. living in the eternal present, i.e. "lusting" after the things that feed our flesh, i.e. living for the 'moment,' i.e. dying in our sins.
It is Christ Jesus, the only begotten Son of God, who calls us to the Father, i.e. making a way for us to Him. He came in obedience to His Father, showing us, in His life, in His death, and in His resurrection, His Father's love for us. "It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Matthew 4:4 "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." John 5:30 "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father who sent me, he gave me commandment what I should say, and what I should speak." John 12:49 "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50 "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my father which is in heaven." Matthew 7:21 "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6 "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father." John 6:46 "All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him." Luke 10:22 Jesus declare: "I and my Father are one." John 10:30 "Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?" John 14:9
"Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?" Hebrews 12:9 "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9 "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." 1 John 3:1, 2
"Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me." Matthew 16:24 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians. 2:8, 9 "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;" 2 Corinthians 10:5 "and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." "He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." 1 John 3:1, 22
7. The parents send their children out as ships, full of cargo they have placed within them, with the children setting sail, defending and distributing their cargo. Bloom's agenda was (is) to take out the parents' cargo and put his socialist cargo in instead. With the children convicted that their parent's cargo is irrational, they come home, with their parents not perceiving there being any change in their children until their children respond to their cargo as being irrelevant, the children now defending and distributing the cargo of the ungodly, socialist (anti-parental authority) education system instead.
In Bloom's classroom every child must go from tradition (honoring the parent's authority) to transformation (negating parental authority) through a period of "cognitive dissonance," called transition, i.e. what I call micro-terrorism, i.e. internal terrorism where they are caught between finding identity in the parent's authority (a "top-down" way of thinking and acting, i.e. of the soul, i.e. the child depending upon the parent, i.e. man depending upon the Word of God and His Spirit, to direct his ways) or in "the group" (an "equality" way of thinking and acting, i.e. of the flesh, i.e. in harmony with an individual-social-nature spirit). Cognitive dissonance is "the lack of harmony between what one does and what one believes." "The pressure [produced in the "group grade" setting is] to change either one's behavior [seeking oneness with nature] or one's belief [submitting (subjecting) himself, i.e. nature to parental authority]." (Ernest R. Hilgard, Richard C. Atkinson, Harcourt, Introduction to Psychology)
In Bloom's classroom every child is in therapy, i.e. why Bloom called his Taxonomy a "psychological classification system." Irvin Yalom described the therapeutic classroom, i.e. Blooms' classroom experience for the students, this way: "The person [the student] must be helped to reexamine many cherished assumptions about himself and his relations to others ["top down" vs. "equal"]." "The familiar must be made strange; many common props, social conventions, status symbols, and ordinary procedural rules are eliminated ..., and the individual's [the student's] values and beliefs about himself are challenged." "To question the value or activities of the group, would be to thrust himself into a state of dissonance. Long cherished but self-defeating beliefs and attitudes may waver and decompose in the face of a dissenting majority...." ""… few individuals, as Asch has shown, can maintain their objectivity in the face of apparent group unanimity; and the individual [the student] rejects critical feelings toward the group at this time to avoid a state of cognitive dissonance." "The patient [the student] reenacts early family scripts in the group and, if therapy [the classroom experience] is successful, is able to experiment with new behavior, to break free from the locked family role he once occupied. … the patient changes the past by reconstituting it." "By shifting the group's attention from ‘then-and-there' [the family, i.e. the Father's authority] to ‘here-and-now' [the group] material, he performs a service to the group … focusing the group upon itself. Members must develop a feeling of mutual trust and respect and must come to value the group as an important means of meeting their personal needs [a good grade]. Once a member realizes that others accept him and are trying to understand him, then he finds it less necessary to hold rigidly to his own beliefs; and he may be willing to explore previously denied aspects of himself. Patients should be encouraged to take risks in the group; such behavior change results in positive feedback and reinforcement and encourages further risk-taking. Members learn about the impact of their behavior on the feelings of other members." (Irvin Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)
Through the pressure of the "group grade" experience "The individual [student] accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) "Prior to therapy the person [prior to Bloom's classroom the student] is prone to ask himself 'What would my parents want me to do?' During the process of therapy the individual comes to ask himself 'What does it mean to me?'" (Carl Rogers, On Becoming a Person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy) "We must develop persons who see non-influenceability of private conviction in joint deliberations as a vice rather than a virtue. It is in this sense that democratic planning for change must be anti-individualistic." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) Theodor Adorno defines a "democratic type of relationship" this way: "the ability of the subject to appraise his parents objectively, as contrasted with an inclination to put the parents on a very high plane." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) If "equality," i.e. the nature of the child is to become the standard for social 'change' then the parent's "top-down" way of thinking and acting must be negated in the thoughts and actions of the students, negating parental authority in society. "Equality of Opportunity [socialism-globalism-environmentalism] becomes ever greater with the weakening of family power." (James Coleman, The Adolescent Society) It is Blooms' classroom that provided that "Opportunity."
Coleman added: "In the traditional society each child is at the mercy of his parents. The 'natural processes' by which they socialize him makes him a replica of them." "Strengthening the family to draw the adolescent back into it faces serious problems, as well as some questions about its desirability." "Rather than bringing the father back to play with his son, this strategy would recognize that society has changed, and attempt to improve those institutions designed to educate the adolescent toward adulthood [therefore] one must know how adolescent societies function, and beyond that, how their directions may be changed." "The family has little to offer the child in the way of training for his place in the community." Hitler was told that he would not succeed. He responded that he already had. He had the children in his "classroom."
Many teachers across this nation hate this process but do not speak out openly for fear of loosing their jobs. As one teacher related to me, regarding her remark to a particular unruly class, i.e. "If you don't settle down, I'm going to tell your parents." She was required to take two weeks of remediation for her bad behavior, i.e. threatening the students with their parents' authority. As I have spoken on this subject for the past seventeen years, going from coast to coast, when I first mention Bloom's Taxonomies to my audience, if you were to take a picture of them at that moment you could tell who were the teachers from the picture. While everyone else is staring at me, the teachers are smiling, i.e. somebody knows what their training manual is, i.e. what their teacher certification is based upon, what their school is accredited on, i.e. Bloom's Taxonomies.
This would be just some trivial information if it were not for the fact they (the Taxonomies) were designed to destroy the sovereignty of this nation (the ideal being: by 'changing' how the children think and act, i.e. their paradigm, through using the classroom environment—'changing' it from teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is to the "building of humanist-socialist-globalist relationships," i.e. using "higher order thinking skills" on morals and ethics—the world can be 'changed'. As Karl Marx said: "Concerning the changing of circumstances [the world] by men, the educator must himself be educated." "The changing of circumstances and of self can only be grasped and rationally understood as revolutionary practice [praxis]." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach # 3) "The goal of revolutionary activity was understood as the unifying of theory and praxis." ["unifying" the child's natural (carnal, worldly) thoughts and natural actions (impulses and urges), i.e. along with all the other children in the classroom, and putting them into socialist action, i.e. into praxis, negating the Father's authority, i.e. negating the restrainer of impulses and urges from the mind of the people and from the face of the land] "By The Authoritarian Personality [Theodor Adorno's Book, i.e. the paradigm or "Weltanschauung" of Bloom's Taxonomies] 'revolutionary' had changed to 'democratic.'" (Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination) "We may call this new order by the name of democratic socialism but the name does not matter." "All that matters is that the opportunity for genuine activity be restored to the individual; that the purposes of society and of his own become identical." (Erick Fromm, Escape from Freedom—Bloom's other "Weltanschauung") "Only when the immediate interests [the worldly desires of the students] are integrated into a total view [of 'changing' the world] and related to the final goal of the process [negating the Father's authority] do they become revolutionary," (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness—"Class Consciousness" is when the children see themselves as "one" people, i.e. victims oppressed by their parents, as citizens oppressed by their leaders).
"Changing a group atmosphere [changing the traditional classroom environment into a "group grade" environment] from autocracy [from parental authority] toward democracy [toward socialism-globalism] through a democratic leadership [with the "help" of a facilitator of 'change'] means that the autocratic followers must shift toward a genuine acceptance of the role of democratic followers [the traditional minded students must willingly participate in (experiment with) socialism]." "It is of utmost importance that the trainer of democratic leaders [the facilitator of 'change'] establish and hold his position of leadership." "In a democratic process deviation [deviancy] is welcomed as a possible source of improvement in common ways of thinking and acting." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)
Not only are our religious rights (children under a Father's authority, man under God's authority) under attack but so are our property rights, business rights, and even our right of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. They are negated in such a system, with the right of happiness, i.e. pleasure, i.e. "enjoyment, i.e. "lust" being "guaranteed" by the government, i.e. with man's carnal nature coming first, 'justifying' whether one has the right of liberty or even life itself, depending upon whether they stand in the way of universal pleasure (abomination) or have the potential of doing so or aid and abed in its 'liberation.' This is the "objective" of Blooms' Taxonomies of Education Objectives, i.e. the negation of the right of parental authority in the thoughts and actions of the children of the world, 'liberating' man from Godly restraint. Do not be fooled by the "smiling" faces of the children and the "smooth talking" facilitators of 'change,' trying to seduce, deceive, and manipulate you into believing that Benjamin Bloom (as Karl Marx) was more right than wrong. The tombstone of the demolition expert can read "He was more right than wrong." The issue is he was (they were) dead wrong. "There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25
8. Abraham Maslow wrote: "Marxian theory needs Freudian-type instinct theory to round it out. And of course, vice versa."" "This is a realistic combination of the Marxian version & the Humanistic. (Better add to definition of "humanistic" that it also means one species, One World.)" (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)
"The critique of religion ends in the doctrine that man is the supreme being for man; .... The critique of religion ends with the categorical imperative to overthrow all conditions in which man is a debased, enslaved, neglected, contemptible being." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right') "As the Frankfurt School wrestled with how to 'reinvigorate Marx', they 'found the missing link in Freud'" (Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination) "Freud speaks of religion [man seeking to please God as the child seeks to please his Father] as a 'substitute-gratification' – the Freudian analogue to the Marxian formula, 'opiate of the people.'" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
"Psychoanalysis must treat religion [man having faith in God as a child has faith in his father, obeying His commands and accepting his chastening when he disobeys] as a neurosis." "The bondage of all cultures to their cultural heritage is a neurotic construction." "Parental discipline, religious denunciation of bodily pleasure, . . . have all left man overly docile, but secretly in his unconscious unconvinced, and therefore neurotic [i.e., man's sinful nature prevails despite the law of God, therefore that which comes naturally to man, his sinful nature must be made the law of the land]." "Neurotic symptoms, with their fixations on perversions and obscenities, demonstrate the refusal of the unconscious essence of our being to acquiesce in the dualism of flesh and spirit, higher and lower." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) "Every neurosis is an example of dynamic adaptation; it is essentially an adaptation to such external conditions as are in themselves irrational and, generally speaking, unfavorable to the growth of the child [naturally, 'rationality' and 'favorability' to the child is based upon his 'feeling's of the 'moment,' not upon his parent's commands which inhibit or restrain them]." (Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom)
"In psychology, Freud and his followers have presented convincing arguments that the id [the child's impulses and urges of the 'moment'], man's basic and unconscious nature, is primarily made up of instincts which would, if permitted expression, result in incest, murder, and other crimes. The whole problem of therapy, as seen by this group, is how to hold these untamed forces in check in a wholesome and constructive manner, rather than in the costly fashion of the neurotic [how can you "hold "incest, murder, and other crimes" "in check" for the "betterment" of society, rather than "repress" them, defending parental authority, i.e. crime can be "used" to gain access into the community of interest for the 'purpose' of 'change," i.e. "The community of interest generated by crime, disorder and fear of crime becomes the goal to allow community policing officer an entree into the geographic community." (Robert Trojanowicz, The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing)]." (Carl Rogers, On becoming a person) "For Marx, man's being & consciousness are determined by the structure of his society." "Third-Force psychology is also epi-Marxian in these senses, i.e., including the most basic scheme as true-good social conditions are necessary for personal growth, bad social conditions stunt human nature, material conditions are pre-potent over spiritual ones [the child's nature, to be at-one-with nature, in pleasure, in the 'moment,' existed before the Father's first command and threat of chastening, restraining it], & SA [Self-Actualized—"Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Further Reaches of Human Nature)] potentials, religious, laws, philosophy, ideology, are in fact all by-products of basic social & economic conditions, while cutting out the dogmatic Marxian a priori crap. This is to say, one could reinterpret Marx into a self-actualization-fostering Third- and Fourth-Force psychology-philosophy. And my impression is anyway that this is the direction in which they are going now." "The whole discussion becomes species-wide, One World, at least so far as the guiding goal is concerned. To get to that goal is politics & is in time and space & will take a long time & cost much blood." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow) "My work on motivations come from the clinic, from a study of neurotic people. This carry-over from the study of neurosis to the study of labor in factories is legitimate. These are articles of faith rather than articles of final knowledge." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management)
9. "Social control is most effective at the individual level. The personal conscience is the key element in ensuring self-control, refraining from deviant behavior even when it can be easily perpetrated. The family, the next most important unit affecting social control, is obviously instrumental in the initial formation of the conscience and in the continued reinforcement of the values that encourage law abiding behavior." (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing) While Trojanowicz recognized the effect parents have in the development of the conscience he also knew that if "community" was to become the focus of thought and action, the interests of the parents, which superseded the standards they establish for their children in the home, had to be brought into play. By finding this exception to the rule, where the parents compromised for the sake of family associations outside the home, i.e. community participation, "community" could be "identified." His focus was therefore upon "identifying" the compromise which was "necessary" if "community" was to be initiated and sustained. This was the only pathway which could be taken if a world of 'change' was to become 'reality.' "... once you can identify a community, you have discovered the primary unit of society above the level of the individual and the family that can be mobilized to take concerted action to bring about positive social change." Carl Rogers, regarding "positive social change," wrote: "'Now that we know how positive reinforcement works [dialoguing opinions, i.e. "feelings" and "thought's" to a consensus, i.e. to a "feeling" or sensation of "oneness," i.e. a Heresiarchal Paradigm of 'change', i.e. of revolution], and why negative doesn't' [preaching and teaching truth to be accepted "as given," and chastening when it is rejected, i.e. a Patriarchal Paradigm of revelation, i.e. of "It is written ..." and "Because I said so," i.e. engendering a "guilty conscience" for disobedience] ... 'we can be more deliberate and hence more successful in our cultural design. We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled, though they are following a code much more scrupulously than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That's the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement―there's no restrain and no revolt. By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior―the motives, the desires, the wished. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
10. George Hegel wrote: "The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such." (George Hegel, System of Ethical Life) Karl Marx wrote: "Once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the holy family [with the Son being obedient to His Father's authority in all things, even unto death], the former must itself be annihilated theoretically and practically." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #4) Sigmund Freud wrote: "'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same." (Herbart Marcuse explaining Freud's historiography in his book, Eros and Civilization: a psychological inquiry into Freud) "... the hatred against patriarchal suppression—a ‘barrier to incest,' ... the desire (for the sons) to return to the mother [to be at-one-with nature, i.e. following after their natural urges and impulses of the 'moment']—culminates in the rebellion of the exiled sons, the collective killing and devouring of the father, and the establishment of the brother clan," (Herbart Marcuse explaining Freud's historiography in his book, Eros and Civilization: a psychological inquiry into Freud)
According to Norman O. Brown, a contemporary of Herbart Marcuse: "Freud, Hegel, ... are, like Marx, compelled to postulate external domination and its assertion by force in order to explain repression.... Therefore the question confronting mankind is the abolition of repression – in traditional Christian language, the resurrection of the body [the 'liberation' of the child from parental authority, the 'liberation' of man's carnal nature from Godly restraint]. The resurrection of the body is a social project." "In the words of Thoreau: 'We need pray for no higher heaven than the pure senses can furnish, a purely sensuous life. Our present senses are but rudiments of what they are destined to become.'" "We must return to Freud and say that incest guilt [the Father's authority engendering a "guilty conscience" in the child while he is doing (or thinking about doing) that which comes naturally, i.e. becoming at-one-with the world in pleasure, i.e. following after his carnal nature, i.e. satisfying his urges and impulses of the 'moment, i.e. "lusting" after the things of the world—Freud considered children as being sexually active, just not able to procreate] created the familial organization." "Eros is the foundation of morality." "The basic structure of Freud's thought is committed to dialectics [the child's mind and behavior 'liberated' from parental authority, i.e. man's mind and behavior 'liberated' from Godly authority, i.e. being purely of and for himself, i.e. of "human nature" only, individually and socially]." "His finest insights are incurably 'dialectical.'" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)
Erick Fromm, a Transformational Marxist, wrote: "Both the sadistic [the Father chastening His child because of His child's disobedience to His commands, i.e. the initiator of pain who loves the child by preventing him from being "normal," i.e. becoming at-one-with the world in pleasure, in the 'moment,' i.e. of the world only] and the masochistic [the child accepting His Father's chastening of him for his disobedience, i.e. the child loving the source of pain which prevents him from being "normal," i.e. of the world only] trends are caused by the inability of the isolated individual to stand alone and his need for a symbiotic relationship to overcome this aloneness." [Fromm believed that man could] "not take the last logical step, to give up 'God' and to establish a concept of man as a being who is alone in the world, but who can feel at home in it if he achieves union with his fellow man and with nature." "All that matters is that the opportunity for genuine activity be restored to the individual [the child]; that the purposes of society [the group] and of his own become identical." "We are proud that in his conduct of life man has become free from external authorities, which tell him what to do and what not to do." "Man is free from all ties binding him to spiritual authorities, but this very freedom leaves him alone and anxious, overwhelms him with a feeling of his own individual insignificance and powerlessness." (Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom) This from the man Bloom built his Taxonomies upon.
In other words, without society ("the group") become the refuge for the individual (the student) he can never come to be himself as he is, i.e. "normal," i.e. of nature only. "It is not individualism that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society is the necessary framework through which freedom and individuality are made realities." (Karl Marx) "The real nature of man [of the child] is the totality of social relations [of group identity]." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach # 6)
"Freud noted that patricide [the negation of the Father's authority, i.e. the child hating the Father and striking out at Him when He inhibits or blocks him from having his hearts carnal desire, i.e. the child's hatred of the Father authority 'driving' him to kill the Father at that 'moment,' if he could] and incest [the 'liberation' of the child's body, i.e. where the child can become at-one-with the world, in pleasure, in the 'moment,' with no fear (consciousness) of "reprisal" by the Father] are part of man's deepest nature." (Irvin D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)
As noted by Max Horkheimer, the director of the Frankfurt School: "Protestantism ["the priesthood of all believers," i.e. doing your best as unto the Lord] was the strongest force in the extension of cold rational individualism." (Max Horkheimer, Vernunft and Selbsterhaltung, in Martin Jay The Dialectical Imagination: The History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research 1923-1950) Without undoing the effects of Protestantism (individualism under God, i.e. children obeying their parents "in the Lord"), the world can not be 'changed.' "Human consciousness can be liberated from the parental complex only by being liberated from its cultural derivatives, the paternalistic state and the patriarchal God." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) It is what Hegel, Marx, Freud had in mind.
11. "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects [parental authority] now part of ourselves : the super-ego 'unites in itself the influences [the child's own "feelings"] of the present and of the past.'" "The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be father of oneself." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) By making the conscience "doing right and not wrong" subject to the child's feelings of the 'moment,' the conscience, as defined by a traditional way of thinking is 'change' to the super-ego of the transformational way of thinking, making "conscience" subject to the present situational (relative, i.e. adaptable to 'change'), in effect searing the conscience, calling it a super-ego so as not to make it sound so harsh (or bad). "It is a function of the ego [the will of the child] to make peace with conscience [doing right and not wrong], to create a larger synthesis within which conscience, emotional impulses, and self [doing right and not wrong, impulses and urges of the 'moment,' and the doing what the person or child wants to do] operate in relative harmony." "When this synthesis is not achieved, the superego has somewhat the role of a foreign body within the personality, and it exhibits those rigid, automatic, and unstable aspects discussed above." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) "When we learn to silence the inner voice [the conscience, i.e. the voice of the Father in the child] that judges yourself and others, there is no limit to what we can accomplish, individually and as part of a team. Absence of judgment makes you more receptive to innovative ideas." (Michael Ray in Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management)
In this light it does not take long to know what Bloom's intent was in formulating his curriculum for the classroom: "The superego is conceived in psychoanalysis as functioning substantially in the same way as the conscience [some external source, i.e. either the parent (one) or "the group" (the many as one) controls the voice within the child]." "Superego development is conceived as the incorporation of the moral standards of society." "Therefore the levels of the Taxonomy should describe successive levels of goal setting appropriate to superego development." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 2 Affective Domain 1964)
12. Bloom was concerned that if the local teachers created the test, traditional, i.e. local objectives would prevail within the classroom. Therefore it was essential that tests be created outside the local school system to guaranty uniformity in objectives across the nation, as well as around the world. It was therefore necessary that only those who created the tests be the ones who evaluate them—local evaluation would only "get in the way" of Bloom's objectives, i.e. prevent social 'change.' Bloom wrote: "teachers … yield[ing] control over objectives to the examiners will enable students to grow in ways specified by the objectives." "… places educational direction [and control] in the hands of a small number of instrument makers." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Education Objectives Book 2 Affective Domain 1964) By collecting information (portfolios) on children (do not kid yourself, that is what is going on at the national level), their interests (including their way of thinking) can be sold to politicians, businesses, etc. Knowing the general interests (paradigm) of each school district, politicians and businesses they can more easily determine how to "market" to their local (specific) "felt" needs, i.e. knowing beforehand whether or not it is worth their effort, i.e. money and time and if it is how to do it. After all it is all about money and control (at least at the Federal level). Is it not?
Theodor Adorno, in his book The Authoritarian Personality, described the testing method used to compile information on the students, determining through their answers where on the spectrum of 'change' (prejudiced to tolerant) they were. He also explains that taking the test itself had a direct effect upon the test taker himself, that taking the test itself would change the student's way of thinking, i.e. that the test allowed access into his thought process, bypassing his resistance to divulge his "feelings," allowing him to express himself, i.e. share his "feelings" more openly. Adorno wrote: "The individual may have 'secret' thoughts which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it." "To gain access is particularly important, for precisely here may lie the individual's potential for democratic or antidemocratic thought and action in crucial situations." "Subjects were never told what was the particular concern of the questionnaire." "The statements conveyed little or nothing to the subject as to the nature of the real question being pursued." "The questions are not ambiguous in their formal structure, but in the sense that the answers are at the level of emotional expression and the subject is not aware of their implications." "A natural step in the present study, therefore, was to conceive of a continuum extending from extreme conservatism to extreme liberalism and to construct a scale which would place individuals along this continuum." "Liberals tend to view social problems as symptoms of the underlying social structure, while conservatives view them as results of individual incompetence or immorality. In short, political problems tend to be seen in moral rather than sociological terms." "Item 22 was intended to measure this trend. 'A political candidate, to be worth voting for, must first and foremost have a good character, one that will fight inefficiency, graft and vice.'" High scores on his test revealed a 'conservative' mindset. Low scores revealed a 'liberal' mindset. "Low score ... left‑of center viewpoints ... a tendency to think in sociological rather than moral‑hereditarian terms; a tendency to identify with labor and the 'common man' and to oppose the power of business; support for extension of the political and economic functions of government." "E. Fromm (42), E. H. Erikson (25), A. Maslow (79), M. B. Chisholm (18), and W. Reich (96) are among the writers whose thinking about authoritarianism has influenced our own." Bloom built his Taxonomy with this information (paradigm) gathering procedure in mind. Although Adorno's theory, regarding prejudice has been proven false, i.e. not all "conservatives" are racists as he projected in his research, his method of collecting information on students, for the purpose of identifying and 'changing' their paradigm, has gone on unabated. It is big business today.
Regarding "authoritarianism," i.e. children who are loyal to parental authority (the patriarchal paradigm), Abraham Maslow wrote: "I have found whenever I ran across authoritarian students that the best thing for me to do was to break their backs immediately." "The correct thing to do with authoritarians is to take them realistically for the bastards they are and then behave toward them as if they were bastards." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management) So much for your "friendly" classroom. Do you want your child to be treated this way? Many are, in Bloom's, "group graded," Common Core classroom. Since the classroom is an environment of therapy, Irvin Yalom explains what happens to the "deviant," in this case the "authoritarian" student (the child who remains loyal to the Father's authority) who refuses to participate in the process of 'change.' Regarding the "deviant" Yalom writes: "One of the most difficult patients for me to work with in groups is the individual who employs fundamentalist religious views in the service of denial." "Communication toward a deviant is very great initially and then drops off sharply as the group rejects the deviant. Eventually, the group will extrude the deviant. They may smile at one another when he speaks or behaves irrelevantly; they will mascot him, they will ignore him rather than invest the necessary time to understand his interventions." (Irvin Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy) This is a period, which I call "micro-terrorism," where the student is caught between what he believes is right and group approval, a condition better known as cognitive dissonance where the student is pressured (bullied by the class and/or teacher, i.e. the facilitator of 'change') to 'change' his loyalty from doing what is right (according to his parents) to doing what is "good" for "the group."
The counselor (the "educator," i.e. the facilitator of 'change') wants to "convert" the "deviant" and will attempt to bring him into the "fold," encouraging "the group" to join with him in doing so. The pathway to 'change' is through the persons "conversion" to "group think," otherwise neutralization (having everyone dialogue their opinions will pressure him to either accept his position or belief as an opinion, force him to be silent, i.e. refusing to cooperate with the 'investigation' of his "mental-social" health, voice disagree with the process, or "raise his voice" in opposition), marginalization (through the striving for consensus the 'resistor' to change' will become isolated, i.e. his friends will encourage him to "give up" and "give in," their concern being "collateral damage," i.e. their being 'labeled' as being associating with him and his "attitude") will either "convert" him, i.e. bring him into the fold or negate him, i.e. remove him or "encourage" him leave on his own, 'labeling' him as being a 'resistor' to 'change,' i.e. not a "team player," i.e. "psychological."
The key to decoding the different tests is that opinion based tests gather information on how you "feel" and what you "think" in the 'moment' (your adaptability to 'change') regarding social issues, while what you "know" questions gather just that, i.e. your position (knowledge) on a particular subject. The answers are in the questions. How you frame the question engenders the answer. Ask a "How do you 'feel' about ...?" or a "What do you 'think' about ...?" (or in past tense, "did" you "feel" or "think") i.e. opinion seeking question and you get an "I feel that ...." and "I think that ...." i.e. opinion answer. Ask a "What do you know about ...?" question and you get an "I knowing that ...." or "I don't know." answer. The first two questions carry no Father's authority in them. The last one more than likely does. When it comes to ethical and moral (socialist) issues, just taking the opinion test has a direct effect upon your child, i.e. 'liberalizing' him. If you want to gain access to a persons private life, ask them how the "feel" and what they "think" based questions. It is the pathway to 'change,' i.e. 'changing their paradigm. It is what "higher order thinking skills" in morals and ethics, i.e. Bloom's Taxonomies are all about, 'changing' how your children thinks, while taking the test.
Giving a student a test question, for example, where, in a story, a child is "enjoying" her time in the back yard, with her mother eventually "emphatically" telling her to come in, with the girl staying in the back yard, continuing to "enjoy" the day, with the four test questions only asking her what things she was "enjoying," i.e. giving no mention of the mother's command, will change the child while taking the test, i.e. setting "enjoyment" of nature over and against parental authority, the "new" authority, i.e. the test creator 'justifying' such behavior in the child's mind through the answers given to select from. Lawrence Kohlberg's dilemma questions were organized to do the same thing, i.e. 'change' the student while participating in the "situation," 'justifying' the compromise required to answer the question. Lawrence Kohlberg's dilemma questions are designed to pit the child's desire to survive (and/or the group's survival) over and against his belief, i.e. negating his Father's values and beliefs, i.e. negating (suspending) His "Thou shalt" and "Thou shalt not" way of thinking and acting in his thoughts and actions in the current "situation." Kohlberg's six step 'change' of the person's paradigm was from obedience to God or to the parent to "Cosmic principles or pantheism: 1. Obedience, 2. Fairness, 3. Mutual Trust, 4. Maintain Social System, 5. Autonomous Moral Action, 6. Cosmic Principles/Pantheistic." (Lisa Kuhmerker, The Kohlberg Legacy for the Helping Profession) As explained in the Harvard Graduate School of Education News: "Kohlberg found that young children assumed that they had no choice but to obey rules handed down by powerful authorities." "But once children realize that more than one way of doing things exists, they move to making moral decisions from a position of self-interest (Stage 2). Furthering individual relationships becomes the main concern in Stage 3, whereas by Stage 6, a person works for a moral society—for justice—to the point of disobeying unjust laws." If you believe in absolutes, i.e. in obeying God and/or in children obeying their parents then there are no right answer to Kohlberg's dilemma questions except not to answer them, i.e. not to participate (and get a bad grade).
This being the case, evaluation of where a student is along the continuum of 'change' is essential if 'change' is to be not only initiated by also sustained. "Objectives based evaluation," which is used by the Pentagon (introduced to it by Ralph Tyler, Bloom dedicated his Taxonomy too Tyler—Tyler wrote: "Educational philosophies in a democratic society are likely to emphasize strongly democratic values. These four values are: The importance of every human being. Opportunity for wide participation in social groups in society. Encouragement of variability of life styles. Faith in intelligence rather than authority." Ralph Tyler in Frank Brown, Education for Responsible Citizenship), became the basic "tool of evaluation" for ESEA (the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) in 1969, with federal funding depending upon how affective schools are in implementing Bloom's Taxonomies in their classrooms, with state testing providing that information (testing "low-level," i.e. traditional values and "high-level," i.e. socialist values, i.e. where along this spectrum the student's are at the time, with funding based upon their moving in the "right" direction). By the 1980's the Taxonomies were being "updated" (by Marzano) to overcome the deficiencies revealed by "A Nation at Risk," with "No Child Left Behind" (we will not leave any child behind, still subject to their parent's authority) and "All Children At Risk" (unadaptable to 'change,' still holding onto their parent's traditional way of thinking and acting) becoming the mantra of the day.
It seems innocent (at least the one's creating the test questions want you to feel and think it is innocent, i.e. they are innocent). Like the "innocent" bystander in the garden in Eden, i.e. the master facilitating of 'change,' saying "I didn't do anything wrong, I just gave them some suggestions that they had not considered before. They, naturally following their own inclinations, are the one's who carried them out." But it is not innocent. It is wicked, perpetrated by the father of lies.
By using opinion questions (polls, surveys, and feasibility studies), political and social institutions can "make customers," i.e. keep their "customers" coming back supporting them (and the system) without the "customers" knowing what is happening to them, i.e. how they are being seduced, deceived, and manipulated for political-financial gain. "We know how to change the opinions of an individual in a selected direction, without his ever becoming aware of the stimuli which changed his opinion." "We can predict ... whether they tend to be prejudiced [absolutist's] or unprejudiced [relativist's]." "We know how to influence the buying behavior of individuals by setting up conditions which provide satisfaction for needs of which they are unconscious, but which we have been able to determine." "…our potential ability to influence or control the behavior of groups. If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors will follow." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)
Give the test creators and examiners the "power and authority" and they will do (control) the rest, i.e. keeping you and your children under their "power and authority" for the "betterment" of society, i.e. for their personal gain (why "politicians," "businesses," "educators," "ministers," the media, etc. i.e. those who have sold their soul to the system support the process of 'change'). By keeping the test creators local, i.e. keeping the questions under your local watchful eyes, you can maintain your 'liberties,' otherwise your "civic servants" will no longer "serve and protect" your inalienable rights (the individual, under God, i.e. the child, under the parent's authority) but "human rights" (socialism-globalism-environmentalism, i.e. "the community" of 'change'). The test questions (polls, surveys, and feasibility studies) are important. They are the eye of the beast. Therefore they will be protected, i.e. kept from your eyes at all cost, i.e. the test creators giving you only what they want you to see, to keep your "trust" in them. "Cursed is the man who trust in man and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD. Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is." Jeremiah 17:5, 7
13. We either define oppression by the standards of Karl Marx (humanism, i.e. the impulses and urges of the children) or by the standards of God (religion, i.e. the authority of the Father, i.e. the parents). Karl Marx believed: "Religion [the children accepting the Father's authority over them, directing their steps] is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people." (Karl Marx, Selected writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy, translated by T. B. Bottomore) Paulo Freire, following in suit, wrote: "How can the oppressed, as divided, unauthentic beings, participate in developing the pedagogy of their liberation? Only as they discover themselves to be 'hosts' of the oppressor can they contribute to the midwifery of their liberating pedagogy. As long as they live in the duality in which to be is to be like and to be like is to be like the oppressor, this contribution is impossible. The pedagogy of the oppressed is an instrument for their critical discovery that both they and their oppressors are manifestations of dehumanization. In order for the oppressed to be able to wage the struggle for their liberation, they must perceive the reality of oppression not as a closed world from which there is no exit, but as a limiting situation which they can transform." (Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed) The issue, for Freire (and Bloom), was not just getting the children away from the parent, i.e. by simply getting rid of the parent, but also how to get the parent (the parent's "top-down," "right-wrong" way of thinking and acting) out of the child, and thereby get Godly restraint, i.e. the "oppressing" of "human nature," out of society. The end result is that either the parents "cast out" the children of revolution, i.e. those of dialectic 'reasoning' or the children of dialectic 'reasoning' will put into praxis the killing of them, doing it with no "guilty conscience," it is the only way it can be.
While the world seeks to oppress you, you don't need to be depressed. The only reason you become depressed is because "God is not doing it your way." Do it his way: "Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him," letting him direct your paths. Proverb. 3: 5-6 and you won't be depressed, having instead the joy, love, and peace of the Lord.
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2014-2015