authorityresearch.com

Dialogue:
It Is Lethal To Your Authority As A Parent.

by
Dean Gotcher

Dialogue is different than discussion. Discussion, first of all, holds us accountable to doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, resulting in us having a guilty conscience when we do wrong, disobey, sin. On the other hand we use dialogue to 'justify' our "self" before others, so we can do what we want without having a guilty conscience (for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning). Discussion is of the father's/Father's authority, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth. Dialogue, on the other hand, is of the child's carnal nature, i.e., loving pleasure, hating restraint. While discussion, which is formal is used by you to persuade others into doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., according to your "fixed position," dialogue, which is informal is used by others to seduce, deceive, and manipulate you into accepting ("tolerating") what they are thinking of doing, i.e., wanting to do, are doing, or have done (that is wrong), without you judging or condemning them—affirming, i.e., 'justifying' their thoughts and actions instead.

"In an ordinary discussion people usually hold relatively fixed positions and argue in favour of their views as they try to convince others to change." (Bohm and Peat, Science, Order, and Creativity) Discussion is indicative of the father's/Father's authority, subject to established commands, rules, facts, and truth—deductive reasoning is reasoning from and through established commands, rules, facts, and truth (a priories). Discussion deals with objective truth, truth that is external to our "sense experience," at least at the 'moment.' The language of discussion divides us between right and wrong, right being those who accept and obey established (preached and taught) commands, rules, facts, and truth and wrong being those who do wrong, disobey, sin.

Discussion is the verbal expression of the father's/Father's authority. It is the father/Father requiring the child (even in himself) to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline his "self," i.e., to suspend, as upon a cross, his "feelings," i.e., his carnal desires, i.e., his "self interest" of the 'moment' in order to hear and receive the truth, in order to do right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth. Dialogue, on the other hand is subject to the child's carnal nature (what we all have in common with one another, making us all "equal" with one another based upon "feelings," i.e., our carnal nature, i.e., our "sensuous needs" aka "felt needs" of the 'moment' and our "sense perception" of the situation, i.e., our "sense experience").

"A Dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals." "The spirit of dialogue, is in short, the ability to hold many points of view in suspension, along with a primary interest in the creation of common meaning." (ibid.) Dialogue is indicative of the child's carnal nature, loving pleasure and hating restraint, resenting (excluding) any command, rule, fact, or truth that gets in the way of his carnal desires of the 'moment,' something that we have in common with one another—inductive reasoning is 'reasoning' from your own "feelings," i.e., our "sense experiences" of life, making 'truth' subjective. The language of dialogue unites us on what we all have in common, i.e., our "feelings." i.e., our love of pleasure and hate of restraint.

While discussion is the person desiring to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, having the approval of the one in authority, making the person able to stand lone against others, i.e., the crowd ("the group") when they are wrong, which is the earmark of individualism (under God), dialogue is the person desiring affirmation (approval) of his carnal nature, i.e., his carnal desires of the 'moment' from others, i.e., "the group" which is the earmark of socialism.

"It is not individualism [the child having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline his "self" in order to do right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth, having to stand alone against "the group" when they are doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., "lusting"] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him [makes him "neurotic"—caught between doing the father's/Father's will and doing his own will instead, when his will, i.e., his carnal desires ("lusts") of the 'moment,' and his father's/Father's will, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth are in conflict with one another]. Society ["human relationship based upon self interest," i.e., "building relationship" with others, based upon the child's carnal desires, i.e., one's "self interest," i.e., finding one's identity, i.e., "self" in the other, i.e., in "the group," i.e., in society] is the necessary framework through which freedom [from the father's/Father's authority] and individuality [to be "of and for self" and the world only] are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx)

"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." 1 John 2:16

Dialogue is sympathetic to "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," i.e., to the child's carnal nature. Discussion is sympathetic to the "the Father," i.e., to the father's/Father's authority. The father's/Father's authority system (system analysis) is expressed in traditional education with teachers 1) preaching commands and rules to be obeyed as given, teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is (by faith), and discussing with their students any questions they might have regarding the commands, rules, facts, and truth (at the teacher's discretion: providing there is time, the students are able to understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking authority—while the teachers commands, rules, facts, or truth might be wrong or in error it is their structure of thinking or reasoning, i.e., paradigm I am explained here), 2) rewarding or blessing those students who obey and do things right, to encourage them to continue doing right and obeying, 3) correcting and/or chastening those students who do wrong or disobey, that they might learn to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline their "self" in order to do right and obey, 4) and casting out or expelling any student who questions, challenges, defies, disregards, attacks authority, in order to keep order in the classroom—all of which is structured after the father's/Father's authority—Hebrews 12:5-11. The child's carnal nature (system of thinking and acting) is subject to the world that stimulates pleasure in him, hating restraint (for getting in the way of, i.e., for inhibiting or blocking his access to pleasure). The child's carnal nature is expressed in contemporary education with "educators" "encouraging" the students (under group pressure, i.e., fear of rejection) to dialogue their opinions (their love of pleasure and hate of restraint) to a consensus (to a "feeling" of "oneness")—'justifying' their "self," i.e., their "lust of the flesh," "lust of the eyes, " and "pride of life" before one another—which is the objective.

"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 16:5

Dialogue is the verbal expression of the child's carnal nature. It is the child 'justifying' his "self," i.e., 'justifying' his "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation), i.e., "that which is highly esteemed among men" that the world stimulates, requiring the father/Father to suspend, as upon a cross his/His authority, i.e., any command, rule, fact, or truth that inhibits or blocks the child from having what he wants—resulting in the child hating the father/Father and his/His authority when the father/Father, insisting upon his way, refuses to participate, i.e., refuses to go into dialogue, i.e., refuses to abdicate his/His authority to the child's "feelings," i.e., to the child's carnal desires of the 'moment'—since, in dialogue there is no father's/Father's authority, i.e., no "Can Not," "Must Not," "Thou shalt Not," "It is written," i.e., no established command, rule, facts or truth, except the child's carnal desire, i.e., "self interest" of the 'moment' which is subject to 'change'—according to his "sensuous needs" of the 'moment' aka "lust of the flesh" and his "sense perception" of the situation (what can I get out of this situation for my "self") aka "lust of the eyes."'

"The heart is deceitful above all things [deceived—thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's will, i.e., "lusting" (chasing) after the things of the world instead of setting aside its carnal desires of the 'moment,' i.e., humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining its "self" in order (as in "old" world order) to do right and not wrong according the father's/Father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth, having pleasure in doing the father's/Father's will, taking pleasure in doing its will instead—being easily deceived], and desperately wicked [hating the father's/Father's authority that "gets in the way," i.e. that prevents, i.e., inhibits or blocks it from enjoying (coveting after) the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' that the world stimulates]: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 We can not see ("know") that our heart is "desperately wicked" (full of hate) because our love of pleasure, i.e., "self" is standing in the way, 'justifying' our hate.

Our unregenerate heart resides in dialogue, i.e., in getting what we want (our heart's desires). Our regenerated heart in discussion, i.e., in doing right and not wrong according to God the Father's will. The difference between the former and the latter is that in the former the children of the world (of disobedience) run all over the furniture, doing what they want while in the latter they sit still, as Jesus describes, having been "converted," i.e., having learned to "humble" their "self." Matthew 18:3, 4

Dialogue has its place in our lives—up to where it becomes a matter of doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth (where discussion takes place). For example, we dialogue with our "self" (and with others) what we "want" to eat (say for lunch). We discuss with our "self" (and with others) whether it is "good" for us to eat it or "not." We resort to dialogue when we know that it is "not good" for us to eat but "want" to eat it anyway (there is no "not" in dialogue). There is a price to pay when we make dialogue, i.e., our carnal nature the pathway to knowing right from wrong, i.e., to knowing the truth.

When discussion (established commands, rules, facts, and truth) is replaced with dialogue ("feelings"), our carnal desires of the 'moment' are in control of the outcome. It is why the child asks (demands) "Why?" in response to his father's command, rule, fact, or truth that inhibits or blocks him from doing or having what he wants—in order to get the father into dialogue—in order for the father to become "equal" with him, based upon "feelings"—so the child can do or get what he wants with the father's "understanding," i.e., affirmation. The father maintains his position of authority by either insisting upon discussion (where the child must accept the father's authority, i.e., accept the father having the final say on the subject) or cutting off dialogue with "Because I said so," i.e., "It is written." If the father goes into dialogue with the child he becomes subject to, i.e. "equal" to the child's "feelings" (carnal desires) of the 'moment' (which may not be wrong—as long as the child's desire of the 'moment' does not conflict with any established command, rule, fact, or truth, i.e., negate the father's/Father's authority), resulting in relationship with the child, based upon "feelings," becoming more important to the father in the 'moment' than any established command, rule, fact, or truth, i.e., his authority that is getting in the way, with both the father and the child becoming one according to their carnal nature, love of pleasure (affirmation) and hate of restraint (rejection)—with pleasure being personal and affirmation being social and restraint, i.e., missing out on pleasure being personal and rejection being social, resulting in the social (affirmation and fear of rejection) directing the personal ("group think").

"The dialectical method [dialogue] was overthrown—the parts [the children] were prevented from finding their definition within the whole [through the father's rejection of dialogue, preventing the children from dialoguing with one another, 'discovering' their commonality, i.e., their love of pleasure and hate of restraint]." "... for the dialectical method the central problem is to change reality.… reality with its 'obedience to laws' [where the father's/Father's authority (do right and not wrong) rules over the children, getting in the way of their carnal nature ("lusts")]." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)

"The individual may have 'secret' thoughts ["lusts"] which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it [out of fear of being judged, condemned, and punished]. To gain access [through getting him or her into dialogue, i.e., into sharing his or her "feelings" of the 'moment' with others] is particularly important, for here may lie the individual's potential [for 'change,' i.e., to become of and for his or her "self," i.e., of the world only—'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority]." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

Relationship is based upon "feelings" (dialogue). Fellowship is based upon established commands, rules, facts, and truth (discussion). It is why those of and for the world ("of and for self") insist upon dialogue when discussion (having to accept and obey established commands, rules, facts, and truth) gets in their way—unless the "established" commands, rules, facts, and truth (for the 'moment') are subject to their carnal desires, i.e. are of their own making, and are subject to the 'moment,' i.e., are readily adaptable to 'change.' Dialogue unites us upon common "feelings." Discussion divides us between right and wrong (you being right, making the other person, who disagrees with you, wrong, casing division between you and him).

"Part of the dialectics of the process of winning independence from parental authority lies in using the extrafamilial peer group as a foil to parental authority, particularly in the period of adolescence." (Bradford, Gibb, Benne, T-Group Theory and Laboratory Method: Innovation in Re-education)

"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory)

"The child [and adult] 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." (Kurt Lewin in Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education)

Dialogue, i.e., "I feel" and "I think" ties us to the world which stimulates us. It is the enemy of doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth that gets in its way. The "educator" does not have to tell his students to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parents authority when they get home from school (if they were not already doing that), all he has to do is get them (in the classroom) to dialogue their opinions ("feelings") to a consensus on issues of right and wrong and they will do that automatically, coming home from school, questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking their parent's authority without having a guilty conscience. Dialogue (carnal desires) when used to replace discussion (established commands, rules, facts, and truth) in order to determine right and wrong, makes the child's carnal desires of the 'moment' right (in his eyes) and his parent's authority to restrain him, wrong, turning the child against his parents authority.

"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 Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain)

All "educators" are certified and schools accredited today based upon their use of "Bloom's Taxonomies" (as their curriculum in the classroom), making the students "feelings," i.e., the "affective domain" a part of the curriculum—'changing' how the students think and act, i.e., 'changing' their paradigm. "The affective domain is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's Box.'" (ibid.) "Pandora's Box" is a box full of evils, which once opened can not be closed. This is why Bloom could write in the first "Taxonomy," Book I: Cognitive Domain, "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 all places," paraphrasing Karl Marx, "In the eyes of the dialectic philosophy [dialogue], nothing is established for all times, nothing is absolute or sacred." since everything (including commands, rules, facts, and truth) is an opinion, i.e., subject to the child's carnal desires of the 'moment.'

"To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')

In other words, truth (that which is "actual") does not reside outside the child, but only in the child's carnal nature ("self") and the world that stimulates it. Without the child 'liberating' his "self' from the father's/Father's authority he can not know his "self," and the world that stimulates pleasure in him, i.e., 'reality,' i.e., that which is 'actual,' i.e., of the world (Nature) only

"Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture [their parent's/God's authority aka the father's/Father's authority system]. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature)

"Self-actualization," as Abraham Maslow admitted, is the child 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority, so he can be only "of and for self," i.e., of and for the world only, without having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning..

It is like walking through a mine field. It only takes one (mine). When it comes to doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, dialogue, i.e., the child's carnal nature being 'justified' (by a "friend," aunt, uncle, cousin, "educator," "youth" minister, etc.,)— over and therefore against discussion, i.e., the father's/Father's authority—will blow your child up, possibly taking your home with it. When dialogue comes into the "church," making God's Word subject to men's opinions, apostasy prevails. The same applies to the workplace, government, etc.,, negating private property, business, sovereignty, unalienable rights, etc..

Capitalism after all comes from "capitulation," i.e., having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline your "self" in order to do the job right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth. Destroy that way of thinking and acting and you destroy the father's/Father's authority.

"'Capital' … is, according to Marx, 'not a thing but a social relation between persons mediated through things.' 'These relations,' Marx states, 'are not those between one individual and another, but between worker and capitalist, tenant and landlord, [children and their parents] etc. Eliminate these relations and you abolish the whole of society; …… a scientifically acceptable solution does exist [dialogue]… For to accept that solution, even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [from the children's perspective] other than that of the bourgeoisie [from their parent's perspective]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely [if parents are to observe the world, including their authority from their children's perspective, they must first abdicate their authority to their children's "feelings," i.e., to their children's' carnal desires of the 'moment']. ' '... the ideological history of the bourgeoisie [the parents] was nothing but a desperate resistance to every insight into the true nature of the society [the family] it had created and thus to a real understanding of its class situation [its "creation" of a "top-down," "Do what I say or else" relationship over the children].… the Communist Manifesto makes the point that the bourgeoisie [those initiating and sustaining the father's/Father's authority] produces its own grave-diggers [their children, who hate their restraint].'" (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)

"Once the earthly family [with children having to humble and deny their "self" in order to do their father's will] is discovered to be the secret of the Holy family [with the Son, Jesus Christ, and all following Him having to humble and deny their "self" in order to do His Heavenly Father's will], the former [the earthly father's authority system, with children having to trust in (have faith in) and obey the father (their parents)] must then itself be destroyed [vernichtet, i.e., annihilated, i.e., negated] in theory and in practice [negated in the children's personal thoughts and social actions—resulting in their no longer "fellowshipping" with one another based upon the father's/Father's (their parents/God's) commands, rules, facts, and truth but, through dialogue, "building relationship" with one another based upon their common carnal desires, i.e., "self interests," i.e., "lusts" of the 'moment']." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #4)

When we make our "self," i.e., our love of pleasure and hate of restraint the means by which to "know" the truth, i.e., to "know" right from wrong, we make the soul subject to the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains only, i.e., we become subject to the "lust of the flesh"/"sensuous needs," the "lust of the eyes"/"sense perception," and the "pride of life"/"sense experience," making our "self" subject to the world only, making our "self" "human resource" to be used (bought and sold) by those who—as the Serpent in the garden in Eden (through dialogue) seduced, deceived, and manipulated the woman into rejecting the "Father's" authority (Adam just abdicated, knowing better)—reject the truth that the soul, which is made in God's image, knows right from wrong from being "told." It takes a Serpent to get ("encourage") the children to dialogue amongst themselves their love of pleasure and hate of restraint (without fear of judgment, condemnation, and punishment, i.e., accountability), establishing their "self" over and therefore against their parent's authority. While dad and mom are not perfect, they may be tyrants, using the office that God gave them in which to serve Him, for their own selfish carnal pleasures, the office they serve in is perfect. Dialogue negates that office.

"For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" Matthew 16:26

The enemy of your child's (and your) soul uses dialogue (Genesis 3:1-6) in order (as in "new" world order) to negate the father's/Father's authority (Hebrews 12:5-11), in order to negate the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning (Romans 7:14-25) so the child (and the facilitator of 'change' and you) can do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., enjoy the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (that the world stimulates) with impunity, dying in his or her and your sins. Defining the soul or anything through dialogue makes it subject to your carnal desires of the 'moment' and the world which stimulates them only. Whoever defines terms for you controls your life—either God, through preaching, teaching, and discussion, to eternal life or man, through dialogue, to eternal death. Dialogue is lethal when it comes between the children and their father's/Father's authority.

"It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23

"[E]very one of us shall give account of himself to God." Romans 14:12

"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

"Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself [quite the dialogue], and take up his cross [reject the opinions of men], and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it." Matthew 16:24, 25

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4

Facilitators of 'change,' i.e., psychologists, i.e., behavioral "scientists," i.e., "group psychotherapists," i.e., Marxists (Transformational Marxists)—all being the same in method or formula—are using the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus (affirmation) process, i.e., dialectic 'reasoning' ('reasoning' from/through the student's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., their love pleasures and their hate of restraint, in the "light" of their desire for group approval and fear of group rejection) in the "group grade," "safe zone/space/place," "Don't be negative, be positive," soviet style, brainwashing (washing the father's/Father's authority from the child's thoughts and actions, i.e., "theory and practice," negating their having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process—called "the negation of negation," since the father's/Father's authority, and the guilty conscience which it engenders, is negative to the child's carnal nature), inductive 'reasoning' ('reasoning' from/through the students "feelings," i.e., their "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment'—dopamine emancipation—which the world stimulates, i.e., their "self interest," i.e., their "sense experience," selecting "appropriate information"—excluding, ignoring, or resisting, i.e., rejecting any information, i.e., established command, rule, fact, or truth that gets in the way of their desired outcome—in determining right from wrong behavior), "Bloom's Taxonomy," "affective domain," French Revolution (Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité) classroom "environment" in order (as in "new" world order) to 'liberate' children from parental authority, i.e., from the father's/Father's authority system (the Patriarchal Paradigm)—seducing, deceiving, and manipulating them as chickens, rats, and dogs, i.e., treating them as natural resource ("human-ist resource") in order to convert them into 'liberals,' socialists, globalists, so they, 'justifying' their "self" can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity.

"Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken." Jeremiah 6:16, 17

Home schooling material, co-ops, conferences, etc., are joining in the same praxis, fulfilling Immanuel Kant's as well as Georg Hegel's, Karl Marx's, and Sigmund Freud's agenda of using the pattern or method of Genesis 3:1-6, i.e., "self" 'justification,' i.e., dialectic (dialogue) 'reasoning," i.e., 'reasoning' from/through your "feelings," i.e., your carnal desires of the 'moment' which are being stimulated by the world (including your desire for approval from others, with them affirming your carnal desires) in order to negate Hebrews 12:5-11, i.e., the father's/Father's authority, i.e., having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline your "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will, negating Romans 7:14-25, i.e., your having a guilty conscience when you do wrong, disobey, sin, thereby negating your having to repent before the father/Father for your doing wrong, disobedience, sins—which is the real agenda.

"And for this cause [because men, as "children of disobedience," 'justify' their "self," i.e., 'justify' their love of "self" and the world, i.e., their love of the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates over and therefore against the Father's authority] God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [that pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth [in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ], but had pleasure in unrighteousness [in their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2019