authorityresearch.com

Socialists Are "Paradigmists:"
Grading everyone based upon their paradigm, i.e., the way they feel, think, and act toward their "self," others, and the world, and how they respond to authority, determining who they will use and who they will throw away based upon their paradigm.

by
Dean Gotcher

"In order to effect rapid change, . . . [one] must mount a vigorous attack on the family lest the traditions of present generations be preserved. It is necessary, in other words, artificially to create an experiential chasm between parents and children—to insulate the children in order that they can more easily be indoctrinated with new ideas." "If one wishes to mold children in order to achieve some future goal, one must begin to view them as superior. One must teach them not to respect their tradition-bound elders, who are tied to the past and know only what is irrelevant." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)

"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 [parental authority] is in some ways brought into question while more rational and nonauthoritarian behaviors are emphasized." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain) All "educators" are certified and schools accredited based upon their use of what are called "Bloom's Taxonomies" as their curriculum, i.e., method of teaching/learning in the classroom today, 'liberating' students from their parents authority. The "educator" does not have to tell the students to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parents authority when they get home from school, they will do that automatically (if they are not doing that already) after participating in the "group grade," "Be positive, not negative," "safe zone/space/place," "Bloom's Taxonomy," "affective domain," dialoguing opinions to a consensus classroom.

"[W]e 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 Bloom, et al., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Book 1, Cognitive Domain)

"In the eyes of the dialectic philosophy ['reasoning' through dialogue], nothing is established for all times, nothing is absolute or sacred." (Karl Marx) "Bloom's Taxonomies" simply brought Karl Marx's (and Sigmund Freud's) paradigm, i.e., way of 'reasoning' (using dialogue, i.e., the child's carnal desires of the 'moment' to determine right from wrong behavior) into the classroom—except in this case, instead of shooting the parents outright, negating in the mind of the students their parents authority (right) to tell them what is right and what is wrong behavior, holding them accountable to their standards. There is no parental authority in dialogue, only "equality."

Paradigms are ways of feeling, thinking, and acting, i.e., relating with "self," others, and the world, and responding to authority. There are, generally speaking, three different types of paradigms: Patriarchal, Matriarchal, and Heresiarchal or traditional, transitional, and transformational. i.e., capitalism (where you must capitulate, i.e., set aside your carnal desires, i.e., "self interests" of the 'moment' in order to do what you are told, doing right and not wrong according to commands, rules, facts, and truth that someone, who has authority over you, has established and holds you accountable to), laissez faire (where you can pretty much do what you want, when you want but with limitations, still having someone in authority over you, sort of) and socialism (where all can do what they want, when they want without being judged, condemned, or cast out as long as their thoughts and actions are 'driven' by "human(ist) nature," which is common to all, and serve a common(ist), i.e., social(ist), i.e., global(ist) 'purpose.' How a child is trained up, i.e., educated directly effects his/her paradigm. When it comes to determining (defining) right and wrong behavior, moving communication away from discussion (where doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth is the agenda, with authority remaining in place) to dialogue (with the person sharing his carnal desires, i.e., his "feelings" of the 'moment' which the world is stimulating, which includes his dissatisfaction with, resentment toward, hatred of restraint/the restrainer, without fear of being judged, condemned, and/or cast out, i.e., rejected) the persons paradigm is 'changed.' The deception is that you can have both paradigms (as is expressed in the Matriarchal paradigm) when in truth you can only have one or the other (Patriarchal or Heresiarchal) when it comes to doing (or being) right and not wrong, with each one, in conflict with one another, expressing what is right and what is wrong behavior (with right and wrong being either established "for all time and places," i.e., objective or subject to the persons "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., subjective).

"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." (Kurt Lewin in Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education)

While those of the Patriarchal paradigm tend to maintain the "status quo," with an authority figure in control, including in the classroom, those of the Heresiarchal paradigm, i.e., Paradigmists, attempting to initiate and sustain 'change,' use 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—in the classroom, grading children, not upon what they know (established commands, rules, facts, and truth), as those of the Patriarchal paradigm do, but upon how they think ("feel") regarding the world they live in, either thinking incorrectly, i.e., reasoning from established commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to do right and not wrong according to the standards of those in authority or thinking correctly, i.e., 'reasoning' from their "feelings" of the 'moment' in regard to their "self," others, the world, and those in authority (resenting, i.e., questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking those who get in the way of their carnal desires of the 'moment'), wanting to 'change' the world—including the home—so they can do what they want, when they want, i.e., be their "self" without fearing judgment, condemnation, rejection, or damnation. Without dialogue, i.e., love of pleasure and hate of restraint the Heresiarchal paradigm can not be initiated and sustained.

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

"Persons will not come into full partnership in the process until they register dissatisfaction [with authority]." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

"It is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Bennie, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) The dynamics of "the group" ("group dynamics"), i.e., the persons desire for "the groups" approval (affirming his carnal desires) and his fear of rejection has a direct effect upon his thinking and acting.

When children are educated in an "environment" where 1) commands and rules are preached, to be obeyed as given, facts and truth are taught, to be accepted as is, by faith, and any questions the children have regarding the commands, rules, facts, and truth they are learning are to be discussed, at the one authorities discretion, providing they have time, the children are able to understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking authority, 2) those children who obey and do things right are rewarded, i.e., blessed, in order to encourage them to continue doing right and not wrong, 3) those children who do things wrong and/or disobey are corrected and/or chastened, to encourage them to do right and not wrong, and 4) those children who question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack authority are cast out, i.e., expelled, in order (as in "old" world order) to keep order, the Patriarchal paradigm is initiated and sustained. But when children are "educated," as they are today, in an "environment" where they are "encouraged" (pressured by fear of missing out on pleasure and/or fear of group rejection—being labeled as being "negative," divisive, hateful, intolerant, unadaptable to 'change,' not a "team player," prejudiced, a lower order thinker, etc., when they, insisting upon preaching, teaching, and discussing commands, rules, facts, and truth, rewarding those who obey, chastening those who disobey, casting out those who question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack authority, refuse to participate in compromise for the sake of "social-ist harmony" and "world-ly peace") to dialogue (there is no parental authority, i.e., Patriarchal paradigm in dialogue) their opinions (their "feelings," i.e., their love of pleasure and hate of restraint) to a consensus (to a "feeling" of "oneness") in order (as in "new" world order) to 'liberate' children from their parent's authority so children can be (become) their "self," according to their carnal nature only, the Heresiarchal paradigm is initiated and sustained. Being told to be "positive" and not "negative" (regarding issues of right and wrong thinking and behavior), that no one will be 'labeled,' i.e., judged, condemned, and/or cast out for sharing their opinion (which is "positive" to them, i.e., their carnal desires) the Patriarchal are instantly identified and 'labeled,' i.e., judged, condemned, and/or cast out, identified as being "negative" ("negative" to others in the group, i.e., their carnal desires) and therefore 'labeled' as being divisive to group harmony. All student continuing to preach, teach, and discuss right and wrong, i.e., judge others for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning (hurting their "feelings," i.e., making them feel "bad," i.e., guilty for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning), i.e., their paradigm getting in the way of 'change,' have to set aside (suspend, as upon a cross) their paradigm in order for "the group" they are working in (on a "group project") to get a good "group grade"—which is depended upon everyone compromising established commands, rules, facts, and truth for the sake of group harmony aka consensus, negating the Patriarchal paradigm, and the guilty conscience which it engenders (for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning) in the process. 'Change' the paradigm from discussion to dialogue (when it comes to doing right and not wrong) in the classroom, in the workplace, in government, and even in the "church" and you 'change' the children's, worker's, elected official's, minister's and congregation's paradigm, establishing it upon the carnal nature of the child over and therefore against doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., rule of law, 'changing' the world.

"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)

"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

Paradigms are political systems which directly affect you. Which paradigm is in control defines terms (right and wrong) for you, controlling your life. Those of the Patriarchal paradigm make right and wrong subject to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, holding you accountable to them. Those of the Matriarchal paradigm pretty much leave right and wrong up to you until you disturb them (thinking they are in control). Those of the Heresiarchal paradigm make right subject to the child's carnal nature and wrong anyone who gets in its way, negating the Patriarchal paradigm, i.e., the father's/Father's authority thereby negating the guilty conscience which the father's/Father's authority engenders so they can do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., "lust" with impunity—their real agenda.

"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

Being "politically correct" means you are Heresiarchal in paradigm. The "old" world order is Patriarchal in paradigm, i.e., "politically incorrect" where children are taught to obey their parents, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to their parents standards. The "new" world order is Heresiarchal in paradigm, where children are 'liberated' from their parents authority so they can be at-one-with their "self" and the world, thinking and acting according to their carnal nature. The Patriarchal and Heresiarchal paradigms are antithetical to one another—one based upon humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining "self" in order (as in "old" world order) to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., in order to do the father's/Father's will, the other upon 'justifying,' i.e., "esteeming" "self," i.e., the child's carnal nature over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority in order (as in "new" world order) for the child to "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates without having a guilty conscience.

The Patriarchal paradigm:

"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? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." (Hebrews 12:5-11)

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." "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." "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." John 5:19, 30; 12:47-50

"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

Those of the Patriarchal paradigm are based upon the father's/Father's authority, i.e., having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline their "self" in order (as in "old" world order aka "old school") to do right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth, being held accountable for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, engendering a guilty conscience for/when doing wrong, disobeying, sinning. While dad and mom are not perfect, chastening us "after their own pleasure"—they may be (or may have been) downright tyrants—their office, which is given to them by God, to serve Him in, is perfect. While the Lord comes between the father and the son, etc., he does not negate the office of authority itself, only making His Heavenly Father the authority, that we might do right and not wrong, i.e., do His Father's will while we journey here.

"The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be father of oneself." "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves:" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

"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)

Those of the traditional paradigm or Patriarchal paradigm KNOW right from wrong from being told—which deals with the soul. Adam, in the garden in Eden, KNEW right from wrong because God told him. "And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Genesis 2:16, 17)

"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

The Heresiarchal paradigm:

Those of the Heresiarchal paradigm, i.e., Paradigmists are based upon the child's carnal nature, i.e., "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates, hating restraint and the restrainer, i.e., hating the father's/Father's authority i.e., questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking the father's/Father's authority for getting in the way (of pleasure), 'justifying' (esteeming) their "self," negating the father's/Father's authority thereby negating the guilty conscience (that the father's/Father's authority engenders—for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning) so they can do wrong, disobey, sin aka "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates with impunity, i.e., without being held accountable for their carnal thoughts and carnal actions, i.e., praxis (at least in their mind). Those of the Heresiarchal paradigm "know" right from wrong according to their carnal nature ("sense experience"), with pleasure being right and missing out on pleasure being wrong.

"To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right') In other words, pleasure (and the world that stimulates it) is the 'drive' and the 'purpose' of our being. "Why am I here?" "For pleasure." i.e., to "feel good," i.e., like God.

"Experience is, for me, the highest authority." "Neither the Bible nor the prophets, neither the revelations of God can take precedence over my own direct experience." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

"The heart is deceitful above all things [deceived in thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's will, i.e., "lusting" (chasing) after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates 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 its way," i.e. that prevents, i.e., inhibits or blocks it from enjoying (coveting after) the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which 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.

"... the superego 'unites in itself the influences of the present and of the past ['justifying' the child's "feelings" or "sense experience" of the past and the present]." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) The child 'justifying' his "self," i.e., his "feelings," i.e., his "lusting' after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' i.e., in the present, 'justifies' his hatred toward of the father's/Father's authority for preventing him from enjoying the carnal pleasure in the past.

To the Heresiarch, what is 'rational' is real ("actual") and what is real ("actual") is 'rational,' 'rational' being whatever makes him "feel" good about his "self," 'justifying' his "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, hating restraint. In his mind ('reasoning' from/through his "feelings" of the 'moment') whoever gets in the way of his "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, preventing him from enjoying his "self," judging him when he does wrong, disobeys, sins instead, making him "feel" bad about his "self" is irrational. Therefore, in his 'logic,' 'reasoning' from/through his carnal desires ("self interest") of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, the Patriarch and his/His commands, rules, facts, and truth are irrelevant when it comes to determining right and wrong behavior. The child turning and walking away, yelled, in contempt toward the parent, who had just commanding him to stay in, prevented him from going out with his friends, "You just don't understand." i.e., Your being unreasonable, i.e., irrational, and therefore irrelevant (not worth listening to)—walking away in contempt.

The Heresiarch, being "good" or becoming "good," i.e., like God in his eyes, can not see his "self," i.e., his "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates and his hatred toward restraint, i.e., hatred toward the father's/Father's authority as being "wrong," bad, evil, or wicked. He can only see those who accuse him of being wrong, bad, evil, or wicked as being wrong, bad, evil, or wicked, 'justifying' his negation of the father's/Father's authority and those adhering to it (called "the negation of negation"). In doing so he follows after the motto of the French Revolution, i.e., Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité, 'liberating' his "self" from the father's/Father's authority, through dialogue 'discovering' his commonality with other children like him, based upon his and their common carnal nature, uniting his "self" with them as one in negating the father's/Father's authority from the face of the earth, so he, along with them can do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., "lust" with impunity, i.e., without having a guilty conscience.

"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

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." Isaiah 55:8, 9

"For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin." Hebrews 7:14-25

If you love the law of God, desiring to do right and not wrong according to them then you hate the flesh, i.e., hate do wrong instead of right. But if you love the flesh then you hate the law of God for getting in the way, making you "feel" bad (guilty) for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates. By focusing upon (beginning) with the flesh, i.e., with your "feelings," i.e., your carnal desires of the 'moment' and the world which stimulates them, with the idea of becoming "better," the duality of right and wrong is overcome, i.e., wrong is negated. This is where the Matriarchal paradigm comes into play, where compromise, i.e., setting aside right and wrong in order to "get along," i.e., in order to overcome "controversy," i.e., conflict and tension in life becomes the pathway to peace (worldly peace).

"History, almost universally, has dichotomized this higher & lower, but it is now clear that they are on the same continuum, in a hierarchical-integration of prepotency & pospotency." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)

"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 stasis to process." "At one end of the continuum the individual avoids close relationships, which are perceived as being dangerous. At the other end he lives openly and freely in relation to the therapist and to others, guiding his behavior on the basis of his immediate experiencing – he has become an integrated process of changingness." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

The Matriarchal paradigm:

Those of the Matriarchal paradigm are caught between doing right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's will and "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates—where they have to decide whether they, submitting their "self" to the Patriarchal paradigm, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will are going to live in the world but not be "of it" or, going in the direction of the Heresiarchal paradigm, i.e., 'justifying' their "self," i.e., their "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, are going to live in the world and be "of it" as well (in thought and in action). Holding onto the father's/Father's authority, having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, they still side with "feelings" that conflict with his/His established commands, rules, facts, and truth, believing they can stay in the middle, i.e., can choose both, deceiving their "self," making themselves easily deceivable by those of the Heresiarchal paradigm. There solution to the guilty conscience is compromise, i.e., the setting aside of established commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to "get along," i.e., in order to not "hurt feelings" (theirs and others), i.e., in order to not cut off relationship with the things of the world that give them pleasure, drawing them into behavior that is contrary to your belief, resulting in what is called "belief-action dichotomy," resulting in them having a guilty conscience for/when doing wrong, disobeying, sinning while continuing to do wrong, disobey, sin. While believing in doing right, obeying, not sinning, they are not able to stop their "self" from doing wrong, disobeying, sinning when temptation comes, continuing to have a guilty conscience as a result. Those of the Matriarchal paradigm 'juxtaposition' between discussion (doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth) and dialogue ("lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates), in their mind attempting to find common ground between the two, 'justifying' the act of compromising established commands, rules, facts, and truth for the sake of initiating and sustaining relationship(s). When they dialogue with those who insist upon obeying commands and rules and accepting facts and truth that get in the way of relationship they reveal their favoring the child's carnal nature. When they discuss with those who want to do what is contrary to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth they reveal their favoring the father's/Father's authority.

Paradigmism:

It is from this conflict between the Patriarchal paradigm (established commands, rules, facts, and truth) and the Matriarchal paradigm ("feelings" of the' moment') that the third paradigm, i.e., the transformational paradigm or Heresiarchal paradigm is engendered (the Paradigmists are created)—where, through their use of dialogue, i.e., dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., 'reasoning' through dialogue, i.e., from/through their "feelings," 'justifying' their "self," they make commands, rules, facts, and truth subject to their "feeling" ("self interests") of the moment,' i.e., readily adaptable to 'change' according to their carnal desires of the 'moment' which the world, i.e., the situation is and/or the people are (or person is) stimulating. Dialogue ties you to the things of the world. Dialogue, being a part of your life in this world (where deciding which of the trees you are going to pick and eat fruit from—that God told you you could eat from—"Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat" Genesis 2:16) is justified until it comes to an established command, rule, fact, or truth ("But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it:" Genesis 2:17) where discussion, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will takes over, i.e., takes precedence, i.e., determines the outcome (where your wanting to do right and not wrong supersedes your carnal desires of the 'moment'). Taking dialogue into the realm of discussion manifests your "lust" for the things of the world, establishing your "self," i.e., your carnal nature/desires over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority. Conversely holding onto/insisting upon discussion in an environment of dialogue manifest your holding onto the father's/Father's authority (what Paradigmists are looking for and evaluating, in order, as in "new" world order to convert you, silence or censor you or, if necessary remove, i.e., negate you). You submit to the father's/Father's authority in discussion, where the father/Father has the final say. You 'justify' your "self," i.e., your carnal desires in dialogue, where you have the final say (at least to your "self"—called murmuring). The Patriarchal paradigm is based upon the preaching, teaching, and discussion of established commands, rules, facts, and truth, in order to do right and not wrong, resulting in the person adhering to the father's/Father's authority system. The Matriarchal paradigm is caught between discussion, i.e., the father's/Father's authority and dialogue, i.e., the child's carnal nature/desires of the 'moment.' "Private convictions" is where a person has resolved the conflict (for the 'moment') by finding "common ground" between discussion and dialogue (called homeostasis) where they can function, i.e., do what they are told while having "feelings" contrary without have a guilty conscience, inhibiting or blocking (preventing) them from 'changing' their position on an issue, at least making rapid 'change.' The Heresiarchal paradigm is based upon dialogue only, i.e., "feelings" only, making that which is of discussion, i.e., commands, rules, facts, and truth subject to "feelings," i.e., to opinions, making commands, rules, facts, and truth readily adaptable to 'change.' This last paradigm has been a part of our education system (classroom curriculum) for many decades (from the 50's on) and continues on today, unabated. The use of "Bloom's Taxonomies" in education has been at the heart of it, i.e., 'change.'

"Educational procedures are intended to develop the more desirable [according to the child's "self interest," i.e., carnal desires of the 'moment'] rather than the more customary [subject to the parent's authority, doing right and not wrong] types of behavior."  (Benjamin Bloom, et al., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Book 1, Cognitive Domain)

"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 affective domain is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's Box.'" "Pandora's Box" is a box full of evils, which once opened can not be closed. The sole 'purpose' of the using "Bloom's Taxonomies" in the classroom is to open that "Box," i.e., is to 'liberate' the children's carnal nature for their parent's authority. (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain)

"[We] must develop persons who see non-influencability of private convictions [those holding to established commands, rules, facts, and truth without compromising them for the sake of relationship] as a vice rather than a virtue." (Kenneth D. Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change) There is no "conviction" in dialogue, only carnal desire.

"The school must make room for the deviant student." "This person will be able to discriminate among values and to deviate from the moral status quo." "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) In dialogue, the "deviant student's" "morals" become accepted (tolerated), bring the "moral norm" down to his. If you are silent (tolerant of unrighteousness) in the midst of unrighteousness, unrighteousness becomes the "norm." Being "positive" and not "negative" makes unrighteousness the "norm."

"Concerning the changing of circumstances by men [creating a "new" world order], the educator must himself be educated [re-educated]." (Karl Marx, Thesis on Feuerbach # 3)

"A change in the curriculum is a change in the people concerned—in teachers, in students, in parents." "The re-educative process has to fulfill a task which is essentially equivalent to a change in culture [replacing the parents authority, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth with the child's carnal nature, i.e., the child's "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates]." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Bennie, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

"Laws must not fetter human life; but yield to it; they must change as the needs and capacities of the people change." (Karl Marx's Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right') Laws then become subject to the "self interest" of, i.e., the child's carnal nature in those in power, who, perceiving their "self" as being the personification of "the people," make decisions for "the people" in the name of "the people," making laws readily adaptable to 'change' according to their "self interests" of the 'moment.' Instead of laws being made according to "the people's" standards, i.e., the authority of the parent's over their children (who can not vote—for good reason), which limit or block change, at least rapid change, they are made according to the "self interest" of, i.e., the child's carnal nature in those in power (representing the carnal nature of the children, not their parent's authority), making laws rapidly (and easily) adaptable to 'change.'

"The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways, the objective however, is change." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11) Inscribed on Karl Marx's tomb. All children are "philosophers," 1) dissatisfied with how the world "Is," where they are subject to their parent's authority, not being able to do what they want when they want, 2) thinking (dialoguing with their "self") aka imagining how the world "Ought" to be, where they can do what they want, when the want, and 3) how it "Can" be once the father's/Father's authority is no longer in their way. The problem, according to Marx, et al, is that once children grow up and have children of their own they tell (force) their children to do right and not wrong according to their established commands, rules, facts, and truth, telling them what they can and can not do, getting in their way, i.e., preventing them from "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, i.e., preventing them from being their "self," i.e., preventing 'change.' It is therefore essential, if 'change' is to become the way of life, that parents dialogue with their children, i.e., get in touch with their "feelings," i.e., their carnal desires of the 'moment' which the world stimulates—instead of telling them what is right and what is wrong behavior, punishing them when they disobey. This will not happen naturally so laws must be made that force parents to "listen" to their children, letting their children be their "self," "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates without fear of being judged, condemned, or cast out (punished aka chastened and/or rejected)—instead of forcing children to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, which are not adaptable to 'change' according to their carnal desires of the 'moment,' chastening then when they disobey, creating a guilty conscience in them when they do wrong, disobey, sin, inhibiting or blocking 'change.' Laws made through discussion (facts) are not easily changed. Laws made through dialogue ("feelings," i.e., carnal desires of the 'moment') are easily 'changeable.' Even Vladimir Lenin acknowledged that parental authority (the "bourgeoisie"), which he wanted to negate, came naturally, requiring social(ist) pressure to eradicate it from society so the children (the "proletariat") could be their "self," thinking and acting to their carnal nature ("sense experience") only.

"Jurisprudence of terror takes two forms; loosely defined rules which produces unpredictable law, and spontaneous changes in rules to best suit the state [the "self interest" of those in power]." (R. W. Makepeace and Croom Helm, Marxist Ideology and Soviet Criminal Law) "Rules" and "laws" then becomes readily adaptable to 'change'' in dialogue, i.e., according to the "felt needs" of the 'moment' ("self interest") of those in power making decisions for "the people" in the "light" of their carnal desires—why they use the consensus process, where the common "self interests" i.e., carnal desires of those in "the group" (made up of those of the Heresiarchal paradigm, with their leader, the facilitator of 'change' pushing the agenda, controlling the language—being "positive," i.e., using dialogue, not "negative," i.e., using discussion in order to determine right from wrong behavior) determines the outcome, i.e., the "rules" and "laws" of the day for everyone else (including those who—holding onto the father's/Father's authority—refuse to participate and/or resist, silencing or censoring them and/or removing them when necessary, in the name of "the people").

By those of the Heresiarchal paradigm 'justifying their "self," i.e., 'justifying' their "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates they establish "human nature," i.e., the child's carnal nature, i.e., their "self interests" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the Patriarchal paradigm, negating the father's/Father's authority not only in their behavior but in their thoughts/mind as well (called "theory and practice," where carnal thinking/'reasoning' and carnal behavior come into alignment/harmony/consensus). By negating the Patriarchal paradigm, i.e., the father's/Father's authority (that engenders the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting") they are able to negate the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., for "lusting" so they can do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., "lust" with impunity—which is the real agenda.

    "But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Hebrews 11:6
    "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17
    "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Hebrews 11:1
    "For we walk by faith [the Father's authority], not by sight [our carnal nature]:" II Corinthians 5:7

The woman in the garden in Eden, dialoguing with her "self" her desire to "touch" the "forbidden tree" (revealed in her response to the serpent, i.e., the master facilitator of 'change,' i.e., "nor touch it") already was bumping up against the "Father's" "thou shalt not" (there was no Father's authority, i.e., no "thou shalt not," i.e., no "Ye shall surely die" in dialogue, only her carnal desires of the 'moment') making it easy for the serpent, i.e., the master facilitator of 'change' to deceive ("beguile") her (with his "Ye shall not surely die" lie, i.e., half truth) into putting her thought (her dialoguing with her "self" her carnal desire, i.e., "lust") into action (praxis), i.e., into not only "touching" the "forbidden tree" (which she would not have done prior to the facilitator of 'change's' "Ye shall not surely die," i.e., "safe place/space/zone"—out of fear of death) but into eating of its fruit as well (perceiving, i.e., 'reasoning' from/through her "feelings," i.e., her "sensuous need" of the 'moment' and her "sense perception" of the situation that there was nothing wrong—temporally—with the tree, i.e., wrong—spiritually—being negated through her use of dialogue, i.e., dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., 'reasoning' from and through her "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., sight, negating faith in the Word of God). In dialogue there is no death, only "eternal life" in the 'moment,' in the flesh. Her "sensuous need" to "touch" the tree lead to her "sense perception" that there was nothing wrong with the tree, leading to her "sense experience," from eating the fruit of the tree, that the serpent was right and God was wrong, i.e., she did not immediately die (temporally) from eating of the tree, 'justifying' her "lust of the flesh," "lust of the eyes," and "pride of life," i.e., "self" determination.

"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

There is nothing spiritual in dialogue unless you consider your "self" God, i.e., your opinion as truth. In dialogue you live in the "eternal present," 'creating' the world in your image (in your imagination), making you God for the 'moment'—'justifying' your "self," i.e., your carnal mind.

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

"The ideas of the Enlightenment taught man that he could trust his own reason [his own "feelings," i.e., his own "sensuous needs" and "sense perception," i.e., his own "sense experience," i.e., "self" 'justification'] as a guide to establishing valid ethical norms and that he could rely on himself, needing neither revelation [the Word of God, i.e., the Father's commands and rules to be obeyed as given and His facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith] nor that authority of the church [following the Son of God, Jesus Christ, preaching, teaching, and discussing the Word of God, in obedience to the Father] in order to know good and evil." (Stephen Eric Bronner, Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists)

"Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness." Luke 11:35

"And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works [corruption]." 2 Corinthians 11:14, 15

In essence the woman was the first environmentalist aka "tree hugger" and Adam (abdicating his authority under God for relationship with the woman) was the first "humanist," both "children" choosing relationship with the world over and therefore against the authority of (obedience to) the "Father"—making them the first 'liberals,' with Adam "throwing" the woman "under the bus" and the woman "throwing" the serpent "under the bus" when they were caught, refusing to admit that they were wrong, and repent. "Enlightened" through dialogue, with the "help" of the master facilitator of 'change, they were the first socialist, choosing relationship with one another and the world over and therefore against fellowshiping with the "Father"/God. "It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone [the realm of dialogue, i.e., what man wants to do for his flesh sake, to stay alive temporally and enjoy it], but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God [the realm of preaching, teaching, and discussion, what God wants man to do, for his soul sake, to inherit eternal life]." Matthew 4:4

    "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9
    "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

The 'logic' ('reasoning') of and for the Heresiarchal paradigm goes like this: If there is no father's/Father's authority, then there is no guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, then there is no need for repentance or a savior. If man is to become his "self," i.e., at-one-with his "self" and the world that stimulates pleasure ("lust") in him (without having a guilty conscience, i.e., needing to repent, i.e., needing salvation) the father's/Father's authority must be negated. This, i.e., the negation of the father's/Father's authority is done through everyone dialoguing their carnal desires (their "feelings" aka opinions) of the 'moment' where discussion (doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth) should be taking place, which, when it is done in regard to God's Word, i.e., doing the Father's will, is lethal to the soul.

    "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, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to an established command, rule, fact, or truth, persuading aka convincing others to accept it and apply it in their thoughts and actions, being willing to change your position if/when someone persuades you that you are wrong.
    "A Dialogue is essentially a conversation between equals." "The spirit of dialogue, is in short, the ability to hold many points of view [established commands, rules, facts, and truth] 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'—what all children have in common (in the flesh), finding others who, through dialogue agree with them, affirming their carnal nature, 'justifying' their carnal thoughts and carnal actions (praxis). Peace according to those of and for the flesh is doing what you want when you want, i.e., "living in the 'moment,'" with affirmation from others, i.e., no put-downs, judgment, condemnation, fear (sense) of being rejected and/or cast out.

While the Lord Jesus Christ came, in obedience to His Heavenly Father in all things commanded, in order to save, i.e., 'redeem' us from damnation for our sins, in order that we might be 'reconciled' to His Heavenly Father, this process comes to save, i.e., 'redeem' us from the father's/Father's authority, that we might be 'reconciled' to our "self" and the world only, 'justifying' our doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., "lusting" without having a guilty conscience, dying in our sins. The true Christ has a Heavenly Father. The false (anti-) Christ does not (except for the father whose name starts with a "d"—"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.... there is no truth in him ... for he is a liar, and the father of it" John 8:44, his lie being "Ye shall not surely die," i.e., you will not be held accountable, i.e., judged, condemned, cast out for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., "lusting" after the things of the world, whether in thought or in deed (praxis). God's Word says: "[E]very one of us shall give account of himself to God." Romans 14:12; "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment." Matthew 12:36).

"The negative valence of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child thus usually derives from an induced field of force of an adult." "If this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his authority) the negative valence also disappears." (Kurt Lewin; A Dynamic Theory of Personality)

If A is the father's/Father's authority ("an induced field of force of an adult") and B is the child, i.e., the child's carnal nature (the child "lusting" after "a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child") and C is the guilty conscience ("the negative valance")—which A (the father's/Father's authority) engenders in B (the child)—then, according to Kurt Lewin, the only way that B can become his "self" without having C is to negate A first. Without first negating A, C can not be negated. Therefore B must be 'liberated' from A, i.e., B must experience a "safe zone/space/place," i.e., a "Don't be negative, be positive" environment where he, along with other children, can be his "self," "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates without fearing being judged, condemned, and/or rejected, i.e., cast out—so he can become his "self," "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates without having C. In this way of thinking, i.e., this Heresiarchal paradigm, i.e., rejecting (negating) A altogether, negating C in the process, B becomes the pathway to 'reality,' 'reconciling' us to what is "actual," i.e., to the world only. By beginning with B, 'creating' a "new" world order made in B's image, A is negated, negating C in the process, so B can be (become) his "self" without having C. Therefore A, discussion must be replaced with B, dialogue if B is to become its "self" without C.

"Prior to therapy the person is prone to ask himself, 'What would my parents want me to do?' During the process of therapy the individual come to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'" (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

By "shifting" communication (paradigm) from A, i.e., from doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., from doing the father's/Father's will, i.e., from preaching commands and rules to be obeyed as given, teaching facts and truth to be accepted as is (by faith), and discussing any question(s) those under authority might have (at the one in authority's' discretion: providing there is time, those under authority are capable of understanding, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking authority) to B, i.e., to "feelings," i.e., to the child's carnal nature, i.e., to enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, i.e., to the dialoguing of opinions (our "feelings") to a consensus (to a "feeling" of "oneness" with one another)—there is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue—the deed is accomplished, i.e., C is negated. In the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process B negates A, negating C in the process. This is the method of thinking ('reasoning') or formula that those of the Heresiarchal paradigm use to evaluate (and 'change') you and me. They have to start (and end) with "how" you "feel." It is your "feelings" toward your "self," them, and the world, and toward authority that they are grading (evaluating). According to those of the Heresiarchal paradigm, i.e., Paradigmists, if you are B with C, you are "neurotic," needing counseling, i.e., therapy, i.e., 'liberation' from A.

"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 [once he is 'liberated' from the father'/Father's authority to become as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life (separating him from his "self" and the world), of (and now for) "self" and the world only]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)

"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)

"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) It is in dialogue we discover our commonality with one another, i.e., our common "self interests" in each other, 'justifying' our "self," i.e., "the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life," i.e., what which we have in common with each another, i.e., that which is "of the world" only.

"'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 [the father no longer exercises his authority over his family]." "... the hatred against patriarchal suppression—a 'barrier to incest,' ... the desire (for the sons) to return to the mother culminates in the rebellion of the exiled sons, the collective killing and devouring of the father." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: a psychological inquiry into Freud)

"The repression of normal adult sexuality is required only by cultures which are based on patriarchal domination." "Human consciousness can be liberated from the parental (Oedipal) complex only be being liberated from its cultural derivatives, the paternalistic state and the patriarchal God." "The abolition of repression would only threaten patriarchal domination." "The ... guilt complex appears to be historically connected with the rise of patriarchal religion (for the Western development the Hebrews are decisive.)" "Parental discipline, religious denunciation of bodily pleasure [Hebrews 12:5-11], . . . have all left man overly docile [obedient to authority], but secretly in his unconscious unconvinced, and therefore neurotic [believing one thing while feeling and/or acting contrary—called belief-action dichotomy, i.e., desiring to obey God, yet sinning, feeling guilty for sinning; Romans 7:14-25]." "Neurotic symptoms, with their fixations on perversions and obscenities [sinning, i.e., "lusting" after the things in the world], demonstrate the refusal of the unconscious essence of our being [our flesh and eyes "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the world] to acquiesce in the dualism of flesh and spirit, higher and lower [to submit to the father's/Father's authority]. The foundation on which the man of the future will be built is already there, in the repressed unconscious [in the child's carnal, i.e., sinful nature, i.e., in "human nature"]; the foundation has to be recovered [the child's carnal nature must be 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority, Genesis 3:1-6]." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

"Authoritarian submission [humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will] 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." "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "Submission to authority, desire for a strong leader, subservience of the individual to the state [parental authority, local control, Nationalism], and so forth, have so frequently and, as it seems to us, correctly, been set forth as important aspects of the Nazi creed that a search for correlates of prejudice had naturally to take these attitudes into account." "The power-relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem [how to 'liberate' children from parental authority, man from God's authority, mankind from Nationalism aka Fascism, etc., so they can be their "self," i.e., "actualize" their "self," no longer seeing their "self" as being subject to a higher authority other then to their carnal desires of the 'moment']." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

Rejecting the father's/Father's authority, i.e., rejecting the Patriarchal paradigm, i.e., rejecting having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline their "self" in order to do right and not wrong according the father's/Father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth outright, those of the Heresiarchal paradigm, i.e., socialists 'justify' their "self," i.e., 'justify' their carnal nature, i.e., 'justify' their love of pleasure, i.e., 'justify' their "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates, affirming their "self" before one another. Thereby 'justifying' their carnal nature, i.e., their love of the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, making pleasure, i.e., the carnal nature of the child the standard for "good," they are able to 'justify' their hate of restraint, i.e., their hate of the father's/Father's authority, making the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the Patriarchal paradigm the source of evil (in their mind), negating their having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning (which the father's/Father's authority engenders) in the process—so they can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity. Instead of judging, condemning, and rejecting those who do wrong according to the father's/Father's established commands, rules, facts, and truth, they 'justify' their questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking the father's/Father's authority instead—judging, condemning, and rejecting those who hold to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., those who resist 'change.'

"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] 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 of the 'moment' and the 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)

It is the father's/Father's authority (parental/Godly restraint) that stands in the way of the child being (becoming) his "self," i.e., "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, i.e., being of and for the world only. Discussion keeps the father's/Father's authority in place, preventing 'change' (at least rapid 'change'). There is no father's/Father's authority, i.e., "Can not," "Must not," "Thou shalt not," "It is written," "Because I said so" in dialogue, only the child's carnal desires of the 'moment,' which the world is stimulating, guaranteeing rapid 'change.'

"The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways, the objective however, is change." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #11) Inscribed on Karl Marx's tomb.

All children are "philosophers," 1) dissatisfied with how the world "Is," where they are subject to their parent's authority, not being able to do what they want when they want, 2) thinking (dialoguing with their "self") aka imagining how the world "Ought" to be, where they can do what they want, when the want, and 3) how it "Can" be once the father's/Father's authority is no longer in their way. The problem, according to Karl Marx, et, all, is that once children grow up and have children of their own they tell (force) their children to do right and not wrong according to their established commands, rules, facts, and truth, telling them what they can and can not do, getting in their way, i.e., preventing them from "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, i.e., preventing them from being their "self," i.e., preventing 'change.'

You carry within your "self," i.e., in your heart the seeds of the Heresiarchal paradigm (Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud), i.e., hatred toward restraint, i.e., hatred toward the father's/Father's authority, where you, through dialogue (with your "self" and with others) 'justify' your "self," i.e., 'justify' your love of pleasure, i.e., 'justify' your "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, i.e., against having to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline your "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will, esteeming your "self," i.e., your "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates instead. In dialoguing with your "self" and with others, when it comes to doing right and not wrong, i.e., rejecting the preaching, teaching, and discussing of established commands, rules, facts, and truth you 'justify' your carnal nature, i.e., your "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, establishing your "self" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority. In discussion you have to suspend, as upon a cross your carnal desires ("self interest") of the 'moment' in order to hear and receive the truth whereas in dialogue you have to suspend, as upon a cross any command, rule, fact, or truth that gets in the way of dialogue, i.e., that gets in the way of you sharing your carnal desires ("self interests") of the 'moment' (without fear of judgment, condemnation, and/or of being cast out, i.e., rejected). It is why, in the world of the Heresiarchal paradigm, i.e., the "new" world order communication is based upon dialoguing opinions (your "feelings") to a consensus (to a "feeling" of "oneness" with others), 'justifying' the child's/man's carnal nature, i.e., the Heresiarchal paradigm in you over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the Patriarchal paradigm, 'justifying' the child/man/you doing wrong, disobeying, sinning—doing so without having a guilty conscience, i.e., with impunity. Paradigmists (socialists) hate being told that they are wrong—hating the person telling them. Since they perceive their "self" as being "good" or becoming "good," i.e., God, when they do something wrong they can only perceive their "self" as having done things "badly" (at the worst) which is not punishable, just needing to do things "better" the next time, needing to negate those who accused them of doing wrong (of needing to be held personally accountable), since they are using the wrong paradigm to reason from.

By rejecting the Patriarchal paradigm that recognizes right and wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, establishing themselves upon their "feelings" instead, they 'justify' the praxis of identifying those who think and act according to the Patriarchal paradigm in order to seduce, deceive, and manipulate them into rejecting the father's/Father's authority in their thoughts and actions, negating those who refuse to participate (who resist 'change'), i.e., who get in their way, doing so without having a guilty conscience. This is the paradigm of socialist, who, despite their sermons of doing "good" for "the people" leave a trail of death and destruction wherever they go—as children of disobedience negating those of the Patriarchal paradigm and whoever get in their way, enslaving (oppressing) the rest—without having a guilty conscience for their "wicked" deeds (praxis), i.e., "abominations."

"I have found whenever I ran across authoritarian students [those who adhere to the father's/Father's authority system, i.e., the Patriarchal paradigm] 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)

"Nakedness is absolutely right. So is the attack on antieroticism, the Christian & Jewish foundations." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)

By their praxis of dialoguing opinions to a consensus (there is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue) those of the Heresiarchal paradigm (Paradigmists aka socialists) negate the Patriarchal paradigm (negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process) so they can do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates with impunity. Instead of KNOWING right from wrong from being told (which deals with the soul), those of the Heresiarchal paradigm "know" right from wrong based upon their "feelings," i.e., their carnal nature (the flesh), making their love of pleasure "good" and anyone who gets in the way of pleasure "evil," 'justifying' their hate of restraint, i.e., their hatred toward the father's/Father's authority, i.e., their hatred toward the Patriarchal paradigm. Instead of grading others based upon their either doing right or wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth they grade them according to their paradigm, i.e., according to the way they feel, think, and act regarding their "self," others, and the world, and especially how they respond to authority, following after those who make them "feel" "good," as god, hating/rejecting those who tell them they are not god, i.e., not "good" (not right-eous in and of their "self").

"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

"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you." 2 Peter 2:3

'Driven' by their "lust" for the carnal pleasure of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, they are 'purposed in 'creating' a world (a "new" world order) that is made in their image, i.e., that is made in accordance to their imagination, i.e., the carnal desires of their heart. 'Justifying' their "self," i.e., their "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates and their hatred toward restraint, i.e., their hatred toward the father's/Father's authority, therefore being unable to "endure sound doctrine" they "heap to themselves teachers" who make them "feel" "good," i.e., who make them "feel" like God, judging, condemning, and casting out any who do not affirm them and the world that stimulates them. Following after anyone who makes them "feel" "good," i.e., like God (since only God is good) they turn their "ears from the truth" to "fables." "Coveting," i.e., "lusting" after the carnal things of the world that stimulates pleasure in them, they are easily turned into "merchandise," i.e., into "human resource." Believing in (trusting in) those who say and act as though they are interested in them, i.e., in "helping" them get what they want—when they are actually interested in using them for their own carnal pleasures and gain—they are easily seduced, deceived, and manipulated. Paradigmists, i.e., socialists, i.e., those of the Heresiarchal paradigm believe the negation of the father's/Father's authority system (and those who support it—getting in their way) is 'justified' —so they can do wrong, disobey, sin, i.e., "lust" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates with impunity, i.e., without having a guilty conscience, which is the real agenda. God created the world with words. The "new" world order is 'created' by negating those Words (and those who believe in them), making their "self" God, i.e., "good" in their own eyes—no longer needing a savior (since salvation is found in them, i.e., in their "self" being 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the Patriarchal paradigm.) Man's love of "self" 'justifies' (in his mind) his hate of God, God's Word, and all who believe in Him/them, blinding him to his hate—blinding him to God's judgment upon him and damnation that awaits if he refuses to humble his "self" and repent, turning to the Lord for salvation instead.

"These are dialectical phantasies or opinions, that man can without the Holy Spirit love God above all things. ... They likewise said that human nature is untainted. All these ideas come from ignorance of original sin." (Luther's Works: Vol. 34, Career of the Reformer: IV; Martin Luther, rejecting Aristotle's ethics that man can become "good" through doing "good works")

To "purge [man] of sin with all the aids of the dialectics [dialogue, i.e., human 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification'], therefore, is to rob him of true salvation, of his eternal destiny." (Rene Fulop-Miller, The Power and Secrets of the Jesuits) Rene Fulop-Miller, exposing the corruption of dialectic 'reasoning' and the Catholic Church that uses it.

"Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." Jeremiah 17:5

"Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is." Jeremiah 17:7

"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. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil." Proverbs 3:5-7

"... and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 1:3

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