Watch videos with subtitles in your language, upload your videos, create your own subtitles! Click here to learn more on "how to Dotsub"

TVP Teamspeak Q&A Seminar - 2012-03-25 - Free Will

1 (1 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
I'm going to talk about a very difficult subject. It's called 'Free will' Most people believe that they have 'Free will' The strange thing about it, in the mechanical world when they say "The machine turned off" machines don't turn off; either there's a short or something's wrong with the circuit. And even automobile mechanics look for the factors that change the behavior of the automobile. Either the tires are not equally inflated, they look for that, if your car veers to the right or left, sometimes the tyre pressure isn't even, in your car. Sometimes, the lawn mower doesn't cut the grass, the blades aren't sharp enough, or the rpm is not great enough, the rotation speed, so they always look for events that are responsible for the behavior of all mechanical systems. In fact, if you made a blade of a fan, and had no pitch it would turn but it wouldn't blow wind. So it's the pitch that blows the wind, and the pitch moves the air that blows the wind. So we all look for.. even on a wind turbine, is turned by the pitch but wind has to act on it to do that. Now, moisture rises off the Earth. We say "Moisture is rising"; actually the Sun evaporates it. The Sun lifts these little drops by heating them. And they move up and back, rapidly, and they rise actually they're caused to rise by the Sun acting on the drops of water. We equate everything in nature, we never say "The tree fell over" The tree doesn't fall over unless it happens to have branches which grow and change the center of gravity of the tree, so it can no longer... the roots do not grasp enough surface to keep the tree upright so the wind acting on the tree makes it fall to the ground. It isn't just the wind, it's gravity, and asymmetry of balance which causes that. But human beings feel that they themselves have 'Free will' they make choices and 'Free will' means that all choices are made without cause. And if something is caused by something else it's not 'Free will' In other words, hunger, when you get hungry, the organism has used a lot of energy, and so you have different feelings, you have thirst, you have hunger. It's thirst that tends to make you get a glass of water. If you never had a feeling of thirst, you would dry up, you would die. If you didn't have a sense of... if a fly landed on you, if you wouldn't feel the itch it would sting you continuously. So would a bee, but the fact that you've got sensors meaning 'responding mechanisms'; you'd whack the fly. So if all things in nature are subject to natural force, including the orbit of the Moon around the Earth, there's a gravitational field that keeps the Moon within the orbit. The same with the Earth, the same with the Earth's rotation. It is done by physical force, something in nature that does that. A magnet really does not attract other material, But there's some mechanism in the magnet that acts in a certain way. In other words, they found out years ago, that if you suspend a ball with a string near a precipice it moves towards the precipice. Mass seems to attract mass, certain kinds of mass. So if you suspend a ball near a cliff it moves a little bit toward the cliff. What that mechanism is I could go into theories about that but I don't want to do that now because it wouldn't serve any useful purpose. If an airplane is about to take off and there's a sudden gust of wind it will take off faster. And if it's about to come in for landing and the wind moves at the speed the airplane (?) it will drop to the ground. It needs wind coming at it to sustain it. Also, man does not see with his eyes, he needs light. If a man says "Well, at least I can see", if you bring him into a dark closet, and tell them to see, he cannot, unless there's light. So he does not see with his eyes, he sees with a combination of the retina, the brain, the eyes and light and many other factors, which I needn't go into. If all things are acted upon by nature, if a moth has a tendency to fly into light, and a moth has what we call an 'antenna', it's a heat sensor and when it gets near the flame, the heat sensor lets him know gives him a reaction (to move) away from the flame, so a moth without an antenna will fly into the fire. It's the antenna that causes him to back off. If you put sensors on a machine, meaning if they can sense the environment they can react to it. Without sensors a blind man needs a cane to see if there's objects in front of them, because he doesn't have visual sensors. They say "He tripped over the object" No, he had no sensors to tell them there is an object on the floor that he could not sense So if a doctor knows that you have damaged sensors, they'd recommend eye glasses or eye surgery or retinal damage replacement, or hearing aids. If you lose your hearing you can't hear a Mack truck coming down the street, You'll have to step in front, if you can hear at least you got another sense that tells you there's another sense that tells you there's a vehicle coming. So people that are deaf, have a higher chance of being hit by a car, not because they're deaf, because they can't sense a car coming down the street. So, when we talk, in the old days they'd say that we had 'six senses' Like we had six... we have an internal sense of how full you are, you have a pain sense, of the depth of your body, you have a itch sense, you have a burn sense, you have many different senses, not six! (What) we can say is "We have six senses that I am aware of" but you can't say we have six senses. You have a sense of fullness sometimes, a sense of fatigue which they don't talk about, So don't try to numerically (proclaim?), unless you do a study of everything you react to and you say "This is a list of everything that (I found) that Man can react to." Some people, some, very few can sense magnetic fields. Some birds can't; if you put a magnet, connect a magnet to their head they loose sense of direction. The same with fish. So fish have senses we don't have. I'm not talking about good or bad, right or wrong, I'm talking about what you react with. So if a light gets continuously brighter and brighter, your eyelids will come down. And if it gets so bright you'll put your hand in front to diminish the light. You say "I put my hand in front to diminish the light." Even if they couldn't speak they do that, you know what I mean? You don't have to be able to speak. So people think that they choose things. The proof that they don't choose things (there are many), but here is one If you're brought up in a tribe that looks very different than we do, you fall in love with that configuration. That's why when I say "there's no such thing as beauty", it's a conditioned thing. You're conditioned to like girls that are blonde or redhead, depending on the movies, the books, the people you've known. So, we don't always know what it is that makes us appear to choose, but if you met a person with yellow spots on their face, and they always beat you up, every time you met a person with yellow spots, the next time you saw a person with yellow spots across the street. And they say "Well, I'm avoiding the person will yellow spots." No, that's called a conditioned reflex; you're conditioned to react to people with yellow spots. It doesn't mean that everybody with yellow spots will beat you up. We project, and maybe some of that projection is useful for survival. So if you eat a certain type of grass, and you get a belly ache, the next time you see that pattern, you tell somebody else don't eat that because all the decision making is based on experience. So if you touched a lot of poison oak and you get blisters on your hand and you don't know what it is that you've touched, you better make a record in the future, of touching things and then looking to your hands, and then later when you get a reaction, your decision making system is affected by the rash you get. So, if you meet a redhead and she's very temperamental, and you meet a second redhead and she's very temperamental, you might tell your friends "Stay away from redheads, they're temperamental." No, that's your reaction to particular redheads. So, if you meet a gay person, and they reach for you (placed their hand there) "What the hell is the matter with that person?" They've been conditioned differently than you have. It isn't that they're bad, nobody's bad. So that's why society does not believe in 'Free will' They say "Don't steal". When your kid steals you slap his hand, if you catch him stealing. If you don't catch him, he can get away with it, So you tell kids, you give them a sense of morality, a sense of behavior by spanking or pulling your dog. All dogs will try to do whatever they want to do. So you connect a leash to him; when he tries to do his own thing, you pull him away. So, he always has to obey you. But if you leave a dog alone, he'll take over. The dog will always try to get you to do things to satisfy it, unless you dominate the dog. The same with people. If a guy says to a small guy "Go get me a glass of water." The small guy doesn't, and he slaps him. The next time he says "Get me a glass a water", the small guy will get him a glass of water. But if a big guy who picks him up and throws him across the room, He will never say "I'll get my own glass of water". That's based on conditioning. So 'Free will' is an arrogance on the part of Man, the assumption that he is the only object in the world that does not react to certain stimuli, all decisions are based upon whatever reaction you had. If you like a young lady, you get married. In the old days, you just moved in together, but it was to difficult to manage, that there is a ruling group of people could not manage people unless they made a set of laws, and said "You don't take anything out of his hut, you don't take anything out of her hut," they had to invent some kind of structure to keep that society working. In other words, if everybody took things from your log/cabin, when you went hunting you got five rabbits and I stole four of them, the tribe wouldn't work, so morality is an outgrowth on the inability to manage systems. Do you understand that? All Man-made(?) laws come about because we need to have, especially if you get more than four people living together, you have to make laws. The law is "Don't take his bow and arrow, he made that bow and arrow." You give him all kind of words, "It's wrong", But if a guy doesn't have a bow and arrow or a javelin, and a lion comes at him, and your javelin is nearby, he will borrow it. He doesn't steal it he borrows it and he throws it at the lion because that's the only thing he knows that will keep the lion off. He said "I decided to take your javelin, although I know it's yours but there was nothing else I could do at the time." So the judge might be lenient. Now, a lenient judge is a broad judge with broader experience A judge that is brought up to believe in right, wrong, good, bad, black and white, his decisions are rigid as hell. But if he goes to another country that has a different set of values, and he learns to live there, he can understand when you say "Different cultures impose different values on people" They don't care if you were to take one grape from your grape collection (e.g)if you had a lot of grapes on the table, but if you only had one grape the law becomes severe. In scarcity there are more laws, can you understand that? The scarcer the object the more laws. Now, if a man is incapacitated, he has scarcity, so he looks at you that can walk up and down, and jump, he envies you, because you have a wider range of behavior. But if he can be given a shot in the same range of behavior he no longer envies you. So envy is a byproduct of behavior sometimes that you cannot perform. Do you understand that? Okay. Now, what people would like to do, let's assume that you lived in such a world, where a person suddenly looks a certain way and his face changes (e.g shapeshifter) so that girl likes his looks. His nose changes, everything changes, his hair becomes wavy and curly, the girl meets that guy and says "I like your looks" then when he meets another girl that has other preferences(?) his face undergoes change; he becomes black or whatever it is that (the 2nd) girl likes. So that would be an organism that can change it's shape. As a kid I always had difficulty with one crocodile getting an erection over another. I saw nothing beautiful about a crocodile to give me an erection. And I could not understand how a crocodile would want to screw another crocodile, they're so ugly, to me, but I now understand it's chemo tropism, (it's) some chemical, that activates the sexual behavior, not the appearance of the crocodile, "You have lovely teeth" "I love the texture of your skin, its nice and rough." They don't have those values, they react to a different set of circumstances. The assumption, when you turn a camera on, everything is connected, it will work, if you don't turn it on you say "Gee, maybe something is wrong with the camera", so you start looking at relevant areas, is it plugged in, is there a power failure? We don't do that with human beings. When they react in a certain way we say "you're bad, you shouldn't have done that." We don't look for the cause because we're never told about that. But we are told about cause when a sewing machine doesn't go on, "It's not plugged in?" "The motor's dead?" or "The power is off" you're given that. But is very hard for human beings to say "I wonder what made me do that", because they don't keep a record of going to church and noticing when you go to church, if you don't steal, you're less apt to wind up in jail. So if you obey the law of your society, you get by. If you break the law, or you seemingly break the law (according) to another person, if another person thinks you broke the law, and if you got three witnesses that think you broke the law, they can put you in jail, because of what they think. So you have a judgement by a jury which is based upon their common values, not the truth. That is, when I use to word 'truth', I'm talking about events. They don't base their judgement on events. If you're brought up to hate Germans, they can understand that and they can understand why you'd stab a German because they told you in school that the German will stab you if you don't stab him. And the Japanese soldier will kill you, if you don't kill him. So, they give you a set of values that makes your behavior conducive to the will of the government. Government means the control group. The control group does not know the origin of their controls, all they know is that it kept them in power, and if they alter those controls they lost power. And if they gave everybody 'Free will' They said "You can do everything you want to do, I'm taking your throne and your crown away from you". If you tell that to the king, he would lose his power. So (rather) they'd say "Honour the king, never take anything from the king." If you do, they'll chop your head off, (they go in strongly) that really controls behavior. So the assumption of falling in love with an attractive girl, what you've been conditioned to call attractive is what your behavior is. Person says "Isn't there something as true beauty? Well, you can look at a sunset as true beauty, if you want to. Or you can look at a thunderstorm as fascinating, or you can look at it as a threat. There are people that are threatened by thunderstorms, there are people that have phobias about lightning, and rain which produces floods, but it all depends where you're brought up and how your brought up, what are your decisions are. I'm saying your decisions what decisions have been forced on you. Now if you ought to sit back and think about it... You say, "Well, am I making a decision when I pick a certain kind of furniture?" You say, "Well why did you picked up that furniture? Because I like it." That doesn't tell why you picked it. "Because of aunt Minnie. I always respected aunt Minnie and her husband and they had that kind of furniture." "So, I want the kind of furniture that commands respect." "I want to drive a certain car, Mercedes, because the guy next door had a Mercedes, and it costed three times as much as my car, and everybody in the neighbourhood respected him" But if he drove up in a beat up tin piece(?) that was dense all over the place, he commanded less respect. Now, you could bring up people to want a broken tin (?), because the more you suffer on Earth the closer you are to God. So the guy says "Boy, I had a terrible weekend, but I feel very close to god." So suffering, like the 'Penitentes' of Mexico whip each other because they carry the cross that Jesus carried, to feel some of the pain that they feel Jesus went through to become great. So they want to share the pain with Jesus. And later on, the more pain, the greater the sharing. So you can learn to love pain. Can you understand that? The major cause of suicide in the South Pacific was a prison or a tooth ache, because there was no end to a tooth ache, when you couldn't have a man pull your tooth. It was nothing than constant torture. When the white man brought sugar and candy to the islands, there were more dental caries, do you understand? So if you move a bright light in front of a person's eye, the eye tends to follow up, unless you ask them not to. When you say "don't follow the light", you move it around, the eyes will not follow the light. But that is 'conditioning' 'Conditioning' is "Well, I can either follow a light or not follow it." It depends on the orders you're given. Guy says "I was brought up at home, where my brother was very jealous and my parents were jealous, and I was not jealous", because you were brought up in a home that varied those conditions somehow, you may not know what they are, because people can't always account for their behavior, unless your a careful student of behavior to study all of the elements that motivate you. When you were a kid you didn't grow up saying "I wonder why my dad makes me feel inferior, because he knows a lot of things I don't know", and we think "Because his my dad, he knows that." No, it's because he's been exposed to a set of values. Like I said many times, a creative person has been exposed to a wider set of values that you have, in a given area; you might be more creative in making javelins, he might be more creative in some other area, depending on their exposure. So I'm saying that 'Free will' is an assumption based upon the inability to account for certain aspects of behavior. Do you understand what I mean? If you can't account for what it is that makes you decide one thing over another. That's all you can say, "I don't know what it is" But if you say it's 'inborn', well, there are inborn reactions, to move your hand away from fire, to hold your foot in front of you when the ground is slippery. Those are learned conditions. And there are many reflexes that are protective. Those are inborn reflexes, your knee reflexes, that's 'inborn'. You can't say "I'm not going to react" unless there's a disconnection of the nerves. So everything in nature seems to be caused by something. When an airplane crashes, the FAA, (Federal Aviation Authority) comes in, they say "The cause of the crash was engine failure" or "The ailerons failed", or "The rudder failed." They look for cause, but in human behavior, they do not look for cause. Because if a man says "Well, he was brought up in a deprived environment", the judge says "I was brought up in poverty, I don't steal, how come he does?" Because I (?)will not to." He has more influence placed upon stimuli than the other guy did, And he was less reinforced, and he was caught stealing and spanked for it. But if a kid steals a lot of candy from a candy store and doesn't get caught he might begin to take other things. Do you understand that? But if he gets caught and is hurt for being caught he may not steal. So you say, he's more moral than she is. Morality is based upon the reward you got. If you work in a jewelry store and you stole one watch, the jeweler is not very attentive, he doesn't always count his watches at night and puts them away. So you can (?) you might take a watch for your girlfriend, do you know what I mean? So you (?)say "He's got a lot of watches" you rationalise. "He's got a lot of watches, he's not going to miss it anyway." So if you work in a Coca Cola factory with thousand of bottles, if you drink one Coke it's not going to hurt the company. You can rationalise (?) like a psychiatrist (?) "the thief rationalises thievery." Now psychiatrists (?) says to the thief "it costs you 65 dollars an hour to come to me." Well the thief never agreed to that, but the psychiatrist says "That's the fee I charge" When a doctor says it's going to cost you 4,000 dollars to put an artificial knee in you, he didn't say "What can you afford?" Do you know what I mean? He is(?) a dictator. And you say "Well, that is the way it is" and makes you feel guilty if you say "Well, I can't afford it. The doctor says "well, if you clean my place and put things in place in my office for about three weeks, I'll do the surgery for you. You know, he doesn't say "Pay me in kind, however you can." That's the old days of barter, when a guy couldn't afford to give you gold he says "I want you to change my leaky roof", do you know what I mean? So, he says that is only right that you do something for the doctor since you can't pay him. So your right and wrong becomes the thing you do. When another nation takes land away from another nation they feel, "Well, they don't know how to use it anyway", "The Indians were savages" "The Africans would be eating each other if we didn't bring them here as slaves." "They're cannibals, they ought to be thankful that we brought them here." I heard that one in the South, have you ever heard that one? "They have been eating each other in Africa, they're cannibals, so we took them, or we took their land because they're cannibals" "They didn't know how to use the land, we're smarter than they are because we believe in God, and we should manage them because they don't know any better." That's the kind of rationale or 'Free will' that comes about in a society that believes that they are right or that they have 'Free will' In other words is very hard to escape your culture. It is very difficult without a long term discussion as to what gives you preference in behavior. If you say "I like the girl's nose, it's a little tiny nose upturned." And this guy has a beak, a long beak and they call him 'eagle beak.' But if everybody had an 'eagle beak' you would be the funny one. So you understand that? That's why the whole idea of you having an eye in the middle of your forehead, and two eyes here (?) and one eye in the back of your head you wouldn't want (?) the memory developed(?) in the eye in the middle of your forehead, unless you were brought up by a whole family with eyes in the middle of the forehead. So it's very hard to think your way out of your culture. 'Free will' is not a question of rational discussion, it's a question of exchange of ideas up and back until the person says "I can see that, but I still respond to redheads." That means that if you were brought up to like women not men, you say "Well, I can understand that a guy can be brought up to fuck sheep, I can understand that but I like redheads", do you understand what I mean? As long as you know where your coming from. If you give an American Indian (?) watch, he doesn't say "Gee, that's a (?), or that's a (?). He doesn't concern himself with that propaganda, so the decision affecting that is very different. All decision making if you think about it seems to fit the culture you live in. If you don't understand, go back and think in terms of an Indian village or a person brought up in China, and their reactions, the way they bow to you, all learned. If you don't understand that, facial expressions, in other words if a person gives you a gift, you say "Oh, you shouldn't done that", than take it back and see what it happens. So alright (?) they feel put out. They only have expressions that they use: "Happy Birthday!" Or if it's the wrong day, "Unhappy Birthday!" What do they say, " - Wednesday is not my birthday, it's next Thursday. - Oh." "So Happy Birthday, next Wednesday!" Everything you say, your facial expressions, " - I'm engaged. - Oh, how lovely." You say "What a terrible fucking thing!" You can't say that, so think(?) of what you say, " - I'm getting married next week. - Oh, you lucky you! I wish I would meet somebody I would want to marry." All of those things are forced. Well, they're not forced in the sense of arm twisting, they're forced in the sense of environmental exposure. When you salute the American flag that's they way you were brought up. If you salute the Swastika, that's the way you were brought up. But if you are brought up after you learn to salute the Swastika and you're brought to America, you have difficulty saluting the American flag, until you're propagandised enough. And that's what newscasts are. News is managed news to keep you within a certain value system. A broadminded radio station can't build a big following, because there are too many variables in behavior that will not work too well. You can't control people if they lose their self-respect to whatever it is that you give them. So, if I were driving a car and I would detract it by some fire in(?) another the automobile and (?)it killed a person, I would not feel guilty, because I was detracted, but there are people that carry that guilt all their lives. "I hit a man crossing the street, I should have been more attentive" But if you weren't more attentive and you killed a guy driving a car because (?)some car caught on fire (?) and you were turned away and you killed two kids crossing the street, "Oh my god..." all your life you get nightmares because of your values thinking it's your fault. I don't know if you understand that. You could have been detracted. I could say this that there was a significant detraction so that I didn't see the kids crossing the street. Therefore nothing is your fault, no matter what happens. It is never your fault. If you're conditioned to hate Filipinos and you beat up a Filipino at that phase of your life, your not a bad person, you're a person carrying out your conditioning. So I rarely do anything I'm sorry for. (or that) I didn't know any better. Do you think you know what I mean? If you make a bad drawing without art instructions that would be normal. If you make a better drawing with art instructions, you know what it is that enabled you to be better. But if you hold guilt for something you once did, (let's) say you fucked a rabbit that belonged to your neighbor, then all your life you're ashamed of that, that means that at that time you were a rabbit fucker, later on you weren't! So there's no guilt, do you understand that? But guilt keeps people in line. If you give people guilt feelings that work for your factory that produces flashlights no one is apt to steal a flashlight, that works for you, so you might ask "Do you go to church?" he says "every week". " - Are you a catholic? - Yes." They are less apt to steal, whereas agnostics and atheists who (?) doesn't believe in morality, then you have less hope, do you know what I mean? But they may be moralists too. You can be an atheist and a moralist, can you understand that? If you got enough moral training. But a person says "Without moral training people would go in many different directions." Not if you provide for their needs. They won't go in many different directions. If they know they (?), but if there's a lake and you own it, and there's drinking water there, I will come at night and steal some water for my family and feel bad that I've done that thievery act. Because you taught me not to take your water, it belongs to you, and if you succeeded in giving me a guilt complex, you need less policemen, do you understand? By making a person feel guilty you don't need as many policemen to watch over you. So all moral laws are control devices; they don't start off that way. The guy beats the shit out of you if you touch his property. And then the teachers teach morality, but if they don't teach morality in school, you'll lose control of people. So if you go to my school, I will teach the children to respect God, "God put me in charge of you", that's why I am in charge, so I have to teach the kids to respect me. If I say "Look, I'm just like any other being, I make mistakes, I make poor judgements sometimes, they won't respect me, and if they lose respect for me, I can't control them. That's why "equal justice under the law", does not exist. If lawyers go to prison, they go to a special prison, did you know that? Not to an ordinary prison. They call it "The Country Club", they are treated differently, so that's not equal justice under the law. And if you have a lot of money, you can hire a better lawyer. And you can get away with things. Okay, I hope as far as morality goes see if you can think of something where you make your own decisions. See if you can invent something. Do you believe that beauty is a question of geography, where you're raised? If you are raised in a black culture, the girl there are black. And in the South Pacific Islands they like girls with a fat belly, I mean really fat. So they feed them lots of fatty foods and that turns the guy on. Is that right, wrong? No, different customs. Now, girls pluck their eyebrows and they put lipstick on. I don't like lipstick, most people do, they say "Put make-up on, you're going out." I think no make-up makes a person look better. They (?) with the blue around the eyes and all that shit, it bothers me. But that's the way I was brought up, there's nothing wrong with putting make-up on, it's just a waste of time, that's all. Anyway, try and see how it works, try changing the concept of 'Free will' But start of with "if you were brought up in another culture", like I always do, I say the same thing (?) "How are you, mate?" Is that an inborn thing in Australia, or is that learned? Ask them that; if a guy speaks with a German accent, is that learned or is that inborn? Ask them that and I'm sure you'll get the right answer. And if you say "Oh my, how awful, two children were lost in the fire" (?) reaction if you hated children, you say "Good riddance!" Do you know what I mean? If you say "Two Nazis were killed in a plane crash" to a Jew, he says "Good, it should have happen sooner", you know what I mean? If you told two Nazis that, they say "How horrible!" Just show them examples, and if they don't get that, get off. I think I told some of you, somebody in Spain spoke with a lisp, and all the people of that area of Spain spoke with a lisp, because he was the guy in charge, spoke with a lisp, so everybody spoke that way. So you have, you know the story of 'The naked king', the same sort of thing. The king comes into the room naked, nobody noticed that. Because he's the king. You'll have to try it now and see how it works If everything in nature is acted upon by (?)resident forces, that means trees need water, rain, sunshine. Man cannot put himself out and say he's the only organism that is not connected to nature. Show(s) the arrogance of that assumption. They say that "Giraffes are born with a long neck to get the food from high trees" (Rather) They have a long neck and they can get the food from high trees. But they are not born with a long neck to get the food, that means that it was designed then. So always start off with "everything in nature". A branch doesn't bend unless it has thousands of oranges on it. Then it will bend. The weight of the oranges pull the branch down. No branch decides to bend (it's) because of the weight. I don't even think the Sun shines, I think it's a nuclear furnace that makes the Sun shine. The whole thing is a nuclear furnace burning up. And that what produces alpha, beta and gamma rays. And what produces that? Gravity. The gravity of the Sun is so great, compression far beyond anything. If we could compress matter with laser beams, if we could do that, we'll start a nuclear furnace. So sometimes it's gravity, not just heat and pressure. So there's always some kind of acting force on something to make it do something. If all the food were on the ground, giraffes would have a useless long neck. If food would grow only on the ground, the giraffe would have to carry that long neck, always eating from the ground, he has less ability to live. But if all food grew on trees, and other animals couldn't climb trees, it would be the giraffe that would survive. But nature doesn't give the giraffe a long neck to eat food from trees. Nature has no purpose; it produces all kinds of freaks, those that don't work are killed. I don't know if you ever noticed that but a cat is born different, another cat kills it, have you ever noticed that? Or birds peck at other birds even in the nest, where there's food, they peck at the others, and they kill them, push them out of the nest, because they interfere with their food. He doesn't say "You're killing your own brother!" A bird doesn't say that, it has no moral convictions. Neither did Man to start out with, he couldn't afford (?) moral convictions. He killed his brother, when his brother got favours from his father. That's in the Bible. Their father favoured one child over the others. They hoped that that kid would die. Can you understand that? Their decision to hope that was made by the father's behavior. And father favoured one child because he either looked a certain way or he behaved the way father wanted him to behave. If you went to church everyday and your brother didn't, your mother would respect the other brother, as against you. And if you become an atheist, later, if you've surpassed your mother's sense of morality you will lose respect for your mother. And the minister says "You (best) respect and honour your mother", But if you find your mother not to be honourable, you can't respect her. Do you understand that? When my mother reacted to the Japanese kid, I lost respect for her. My brother fell in love with a girl, that was not of our nationality and he brought her home, and my mother said "I want you to go out with a girl that follows the Turkish beliefs". My brother gave up the girl. I lost respect for him. Because she a nice girl, that's all it matters. If she was pleasant, understanding, open minded... Those are my yard stakes, my brother was affected by my mother's decision, not his own. Do you understand? If (?)someone says "Don't you respect your mother?" It depends, if she is worthy of respect, yes. My brother, my sister were normal, perfectly normal people, meaning fucked up completely. So I did not respect them, can you understand that? But I should respect my mother, my own brother. But I would say that, maybe, a guy like Louis Pasteur, complete stranger, made it possible for me to live and that's the history of science. Many people that I don't even know made it possible for me to eat and live, that gave me shots against diseases. They enabled me to live, not my parents, my parents meant well, but they were not as qualified. Do you understand? Okay. If I lose my mental equilibrium and I don't know who you are, or you are, Roxanne, if you put me in a mental institution, if you come and visit me it wouldn't do any good. I wouldn't say "How are you, Larry?", I wouldn't know who you are, so it wouldn't do any good. Like, if I'm dying of cancer, I really don't like to see visitors because they can only say " - It's too bad, how do you feel today? - Not too good?" They can't, they can't go (?) and the cancer got smaller(?). But the visitor can (only) say "There, there, there, there", you know? That doesn't do anything, but a lot of people need that. It gives them the will to live, when people come to visit, they say "You make me feel so good". (?) that's an unhealthy, non (?) visit. It doesn't do anything; every time the doctor comes to visit he puts his (?) and that heals the wound. So the visit of the doctor is more relevant, but we are not brought up that way. Remember, when I said if a person looses his mental equilibrium, they don't know who you are. They might feel good if you come to visit them, so visit them, if they need that. There was a play called 'Tobacco Roads', I don't know if you ever saw that, did you? 'Tobacco Roads' meant seven years in New York. The guy that played the lead gets up in the morning and he washes his face in a tub of water, and he puts a shirt on and (?) and that was a big hit. And a kid driving a car killed his grandmother. And they said "Did you killed your grandmother?" He said "The son of a bitch got in the way of my car, so I run her down." But in the play they had different (?)feelings than we did. A lot of those plays "Abie's Irish Rose", have you seen that play? "Abie's Irish Rose"? It's about a Jewish boy named Abie falls in love with an Irish girl. And in the play, of course, it works out. But in real life jews disown their kids that marry outside of their race... not all jews, those conventional jews. And conventional jews, have women sit up in the balcony, not with the men, because that induces sexual feelings. But the reformed jews, have jewish men and women in the same area. But their brought up that way, it's not their fault. Do you understand? That's what I mean by choices are not made, they're induced. Choices are made by, usually false value indoctrination. Okay, that's it. Any questions related to 'Free will'? Questioner: I have a big question, hello, but it is not about 'Free will' It is on an another topic. (Roxanne Meadows) Okay, go ahead. -I wanted to ask, would it really help if people would create a community living in a Resource Based Economy, just without money, and demonstrating their way of life that it is more happy and interesting to old channels, just through the Internet, mass-media through some street activism I have watched two videos about The Venus Project, (I thought of) "Why we don't build the first city now?" and I have thought of two real reasons: First, if it would be a rich settlement it could be invaded and looted until there is(?) somewhere and second if we have no resources. So if it would be small villages, not rich that nobody wants to loot or to invade. And...if people want to take any resource from The Venus Project, they will just (?) on their own money buy some piece of land to build such a settlement. What do you think about it, will it help really just to create such a model for psychological experiments, how people can live and collaborate and so on? (J Fresco)-I can't deal with that, I just say that if people learn about the real world they can relate, if they don't, they can't. What about the idea of doing small villages within The Venus Project? It isn't the size of the village is what values(?) supports the village. (R Meadows) Yes, you know, people are beginning to ask us if they can build a small community based on The Venus Project, or if we would help them do a community based on The Venus Project. You know, this would be fine with us if we have the funds to initiate it. But we don't have the funds. For us to do another small community by a hand tool community with no funds and just asking for little money here and there to to build a portion of the house and then another one later, We've gone through that doing this. And it's a tremendous waste of time and it took us many years to do it. So to do another one that way is not efficient really. If we have a sum of money, a good some of money, not even enough to do a city, but to do a larger research center where more people can live we'd be glad to do that, but we don't have that, and we don't have access to that. Questioner: You know, the problem is in the Russian chapter of The Zeitgeist Movement. I have seen a lot of people at least ten offers who wanted to build a settlement that is (?)(based on) living in The Resource Based Economy, and the administration of the (?)forum, they forbade offering any settlements and any talks about it, and they said that Jacque Fresco is quite against building any settlements now, so I want to know is it true that he is quite against or not? (R Meadows) No, that is not true at all, and those people might have gone to The Zeitgeist Movement but they did not come to us. I think we have one person come and wanted to offer land, but we can't do anything with land, we don't have resources to further that. So, I don't know what The Zeitgeist Movement is doing, we were not, that was a problem, we were not involved in what happened in The Zeitgeist Movement, or in decision making in The Zeitgeist Movement, but if there was a group of people that wanted to build something, and wanted to build something to help enhance The Venus Project, and have the funds, we would meet with them, would be anxious to meet with them and work with them. Nutritionist: Okay, can I ask a question? I was doing some research on the best diet is for human beings and I saw this interesting doctor is called Dr. Robert (?)Moth and he says that we are a fruit (?) species, so, just like, you know, since we descend from monkeys, and primates and so on, you know you look at all those animals, (?)they all survive on one staple of food, for example, bananas, and that like bananas, just fruit generally are the healthiest diet for human beings. and I was wondering if you came across this thesis? (R Meadows) No, we haven't, there's so many different theories about diets, we haven't come across on that one. And it's very difficult to do real studies and scientific research on those types of things within the monetary system, because there's always particular interest promoting that, so it's very hard that way but those studies really need to be done. - Who is this guy? - Doctor Robert (?) can you recommend it, maybe have a look? Lady: I do have a question regarding the 'Free will' speech that we just listen to. (R Meadows) Sure, go ahead. -In the 'Free will' seminar that was going on, you know, he spoke of, everything is learned and when it comes to 'Free will' it's what our experiences have taught us to react in certain ways. Now, in the off chance that a particular person has any kind of mental issues, causing them to flip and go against what they learned and go against what they experienced. How would you (?) 'Free will' affect those people? (Jacque Fresco)-Something else happened that you're not aware of that made them change. Either they read another book, heard another point of view, and made them question the values that they were given by society, or their society. By asking people "What influence you to change?" Sometimes they may not know, but there's always major influences that effect change. -Right, but I do see your point, however I'm asking you about if somebody has a mental deficiency where it causes them to react in certain ways even though everything they learned goes against that. I for instance have severe cases of schizophrenia. Now, that's not something I experienced, that's not something that was caused by an experience, it's not something that was learned, but how would somebody with... because you're talking about people who have, you know, they're learning 'Free will' as they grow. Everything is an experience, but what happens when some of those experiences can't be pointed out (?)by somebody with a mental issue? -You have to research on the problem and find out what went wrong with their circuitry, what went wrong with the brain. Maybe there was poor circulation in the brain, maybe there was a tumor, but there is always some physical evidence that changes a person, they just don't change without some form of physical evidence. That's what research is for, to find out, what you call, the many interacting variables that affect behavior. -Right, okay, thank you! Ossie: Sorry, I just wanted to say something on that 'mate. One of the things that Jacque was talking about the main point of the 'Free will' concept, was that it's external forces that drive our behavior, that there's external influences social, biomedical, psychological, environmental, £ it's all those influences that (?) behavior therefore we are not able to have a 'Free will' in other words, (?) the environment. When you are talking about someone with schizophrenia that schizophrenic person is suffering from a biomedical influence that they have no control over, so you still haven't got 'Free will' in a person with schizophrenia. (R Meadows) Thanks, Andrew. How does Jacque Fresco suggest we raise our children? (Jacque Fresco)-By teaching them basic science, the relationship to one another, the limitations of communication and what can be done to help them understand things. When you learn to use the scientific method of evaluation which means to test things as best you know how, to arrive at the appropriate conclusion. That's what scientific research is, not to speculate, without testing things. You check things out, see if they're so. When a man says he talked to God, you ask him what he talked about, what did he learned. And you'll find out you get nothing but gibberish, which I asked many people. I said "Did you asked God what makes cancer, heart disease?" No, they never talked to God about that. So what you have to do is learn to check things out. See what information is new. Andrew: Jacque, how do you see the role of parents in the future? Do you see them as having a strong as influence as they do currently on their parents (?) to run a child's behavior? And their upbringing would be (?) more than a community effort of raising children? (Jacque Fresco) Not the rule of community, the rule of knowledge. Not the amount of people, the knowledge people have, real knowledge about the physical world; the more they learn about the real world, the better they are adjusted. (R Meadows) How do you see the role of parents? - No, parents have no role at all. In the future, management of education, they send their kids to school, and they want the kid to be a doctor, they send him to a university they send him away from themselves, because they themselves can not teach children how to be a doctor or an engineer or a mathematician. So they send him to an environment to learn that. If you want to become an airline pilot, you'll have to learn how to fly, you have to learn how to fly larger airplanes with two engines or four engines, but you have to go to a special institute, the parents do not teach that. some(?) well, parents can teach, they can teach their children, yes. But most parents are not qualified. (R Meadows) I know the example you used, I always thought it was good, about they don't let anybody touch a jet engine, to repair a jet engine, or even touch it for that matter, they go to school for years, but they let anyone raise kids, that have more connections in their heads, then any jet engine. (Jacque Fresco) Yes, that was well put, Roxanne. (Roxanne Meadows) Well, that was one of your examples. Okay, would it be a good idea to sell on DVD and mp3 format, Jacque Fresco's classic lectures series? Yes, that would be a good idea, we'll try and get to that. And this person is saying Jacque is great at drawing, would you make a video course or sell it as a DVD? We did, somebody asked us to do that, to make a video course of Jacque teaching, and we shot many, many hours, edited down to eleven hours, gave it to the person, who makes these kind of courses, and he made a course, it's under Simpleology. It's a good course, (?)but they sell it, but it's good. What does Jacque think about cybernetic systems engineer Jay Forester around the 1970's? Well, as long as they don't cover the whole system, I can't evaluate it. They have to talk about how the new system operates, in order for me to understand it, not a single aspect of the system. (R Meadows) ...How would a Resource Based Economy resident practice and engage in physical sexual relations? (J Fresco) Well, that would have to do with the culture at the time. In other words, it depends on many different factors, but sexual relations and the emphasis on sex will be considerably decreased, in a Resource Based Economy, because people have sex when they're able to. They don't have to wait until they get married. All of the moral teachings would undergo change. (R Meadows) This person is asking "I would like to build a house similar to the one you are living and working in, am I allowed to do it? If yes, can I have some technical information on what materials etc.? It would be a good way to spread awareness, if others do the same." We are really not in kind of a house building business, when people want to design, to build a dome we just don't have time to do that. If we did, we wouldn't be able to do the social awareness of a new social system. We recommend, a lot of people build domes and make domes, we recommend usually monolithic dome in Italy, Texas, you can look into that, if you want to build a dome, but we just never got into that, it takes just too much time. As Jacque said, once each person is different in many ways, does a Resource based Economy eliminate individual and group (?)advanced in acquisition of resources, and turn all humanity into one single group. (J Fresco) We turn all humanity into a saner group, not an individual group, a saner group. (R Meadows) Somebody is asking if you've watched the documentary "Education for a sustainable future?" No, haven't seen it. We'll try looking for it, or if it's on the Internet send us a link to it, it would be great Jacque, have you devised a resource distribution algorithm to "intelligently" distribute current resources? (J Fresco) I can't deal with current distribution system because the people's values in a Resource Based Economy would become modified and they would require different things, than people offered today. Today we have a monetary system, we have a different set of values. With the newer values they would demand or (?)access different things, than people do today. (R Meadows) We understand that there is over a hundred hours of old lecture materials from Jacque. When will these be available? Yes, in fact somebody just gave us about 150 hours from 1974 or earlier, it was before I was there. There are only two of us working here, myself and Joel, in the office, doing these things, so right now we are concentrating on the documentary, and also I would like to put a call out, if anybody has an understanding of how to make a DVD and put different languages on it, we do need help with that right now, if there's anybody who can help in that way. So, we will get to that, there are a lot of things we would like to get to and that is something we'd like to do maybe after this. Will time perception be different in the future like past present and future, the time counting? (J Fresco) Well, I would like to know why would you want to make it any different? Time accounting...people will not go to work, or work long hours they will work only short hours, or they will work as long as they chose to. But I don't think we concern ourselves with how many hours, we concern ourselves with getting the job done. Whatever we're assigned. (R Meadows) I guess that's about it right now for the questions. we really appreciate everyone showing up and being interested. If there is anything specific that you would like to ask, you can write us directly to or save it for the next session next Sunday. Hopefully we will talk with you then, -(R M) Again, thank you very much. -(J F) Yes, I appreciate all your efforts. Host: Thanks everybody for coming and we'll see you next week on April 1st, 2012.

Video Details

Duration: 1 hour, 6 minutes and 45 seconds
Year: 2012
Country: United States
Language: English
Producer: The Venus Project
Director: The Venus Project
Views: 15
Posted by: ltiofficial on Feb 18, 2016

TVP Teamspeak Q&A Seminar - Free Will - 2012-03-25

Note: This is LTI's 'internal working location' for this video, so please do not publicly pass around this URL. All completed and fully proofread 'official' translations can be found at the Repository location at, which we highly encourage you to embed &/or pass around.

To join/help with these translation efforts: (LTI Forum)

Caption and Translate

    Sign In/Register for Dotsub above to caption this video.