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 - 2012-04-01 - Education

0 (0 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
Hi, everybody, this is Jacque. Today we're going to do something on education, a lecture that we have. It seems that a lot of people ask a similar question: what will the schools teach in the future and who decides what is taught? Is it a board of education, is it a board of educators that decides that? Nothing to do with that, nothing to do with the established order. The way it works is: children are taught about the environment they live in, how it works, what makes the rain, how water evaporates how plants expire into the air moisture, how plants grow, what they depend on, They're oriented to the world they live in, that's the only kind of orientation I know of, but to give them any other type of information superfluous to the task when they're very young would not be necessary. So what we have is groups of people, geologists, physicists, naturalists that instruct children in the way nature works to the best of their ability. But they do use films, and they do take the children on field trips, so they understand how rivers form, how they zigzag, what makes them do that and what happens when draught occurs, they're given all the known elements that are known up to that time, and children are curious about all kind of things, so they ask theologists and geophysicists and the atmospheric scientists "What makes the rain, where does it come from?" so they don't even get the chance to speculate or make up stories. They don't make up stories, they know how bears take care of their young, how bears manage through the environment, and if a man finds that he catches a lot of fish near the big rock, he always instructs his fishery people to go near the big rock. Now in the South Sea islands, they do orient people to the island where you catch fish, which you can eat, which is poisonous, which you can't eat, all the orientation, I should say most of it is relevant to what they will encounter except what the witch doctor teaches them, that the volcano is angry or you have to sacrifice people to it. Knowing the difference between relevance and irrelevant is very very severe in the future. So, children will ask certain questions. Not only that, there will be taken on field trips to the farming industries, the production industries, the metal that supplies the industries, they'll be taken on trips to see how automobiles are made, how transportation units are made how everything related to their life is made. But they're also taught that innovation and technology will eventually replace routine jobs. They're taught that because a person does a routine job doesn't learn very much, because the job doesn't change very much. If a man drills holes all day in the factory, he really doesn't learn anything, except when new bits come out to cut the metal faster. But really it's offensive to teach anyone to be an uniform performer that does the same thing over and over again. Now, all things that are repetitive can be automated. So if you ask me a question "What will children be taught?" it depends on the time in the future, what the conditions are. Naturally, if a lot of meteors were landing on the Earth destroying a lot of areas a change in what children are taught will be modified to meet changing conditions. It's only changing conditions that determines what children are taught. So if you take a child through a factory and show him where all the parts come from what machines do, what people used to do, how machines replace their jobs, they almost don't have any questions after each day's tour. If the children are taken on a tour to furniture factories, most of the questions that would have been related to furniture are answered on that tour. So children rarely have any questions unless a new person comes in and says "I'm going to talk about gravity and the way it changes in different regions of the Earth" so they have a pretty good orientation. And they're always anxious to learn. And they also know how to ask questions like "How do you know that?" "How did you come to that conclusion?" The instructor would have to tell them how he knows that, what methods he used to come to that conclusion, and then he will say to the students "Do you find anything incomprehensible that I've talked about, something you don't understand?" so the children have a chance to ask questions outside of what normally might be asked. So as the children age, they have a damn good idea of how they relate to the environment, but they have no Micky Mouse clubs, they have no metaphysical knowledge, they don't even know it exists. They do know that at times, people try to account for hurricanes as a punishment to people, they will know that. But sometimes the hurricane occurs where there's no people, so who's getting punished? So they will be given all kind of examples to support existent and working theoretical systems. So, if you ask me again what will children be taught and who decides, the conditions at the time decides what they're taught. Are they any questions regarding that? As they get older they will be taught how to manipulate the environment and change it to act in our behalf. Such as: if a certain area breeds certain type of mosquitos, they will know what area does that and what the conditions are that do that. And so they will be able to offer possible alternatives to the creation of malaria, or other physical disorders. Any questions about that? Adults will be schooled continuously. (?)all television will appear as a newsreel of what's new. But they'll be no "Man kills wife and children", you know, nobody's concerned about that, because those conditions are very rare. You would rarely read about a guy that ran amok shooting a lot of people. Because the question will be "How did they get to that phase?" It must be a long interval between aberrant behavior and normal behavior, so it should be outstanding and self evident. If you make a roof that leaks it's self evident right away that that roofing material is not the best we know of. So you don't suddenly surprise yourself by finding human beings that don't stay put. There are a lot of people that say: "The reason you can't build the future is because human beings don't stay put, they have individual expressions." There's no such thing. You don't have individual expressions, it's always within the context of an island, or the resources, or the food available on the islands, but it's never outside of that. You'll never see an island of a group of them that got together that are building a hang glider. This does not occur. And you will never find discussions taking issue with the chief or the witchdoctor, "I take issue with your views." You will not find that type of discussion on the islands. It does not occur. Is that real clear? Because people think "What about individuality, if people come up with ideas that are totally unrelated to the environment?" There's no evidence to support that. I never remember a plumber saying "We ought to prefabricate plumbing so the parts are uniform and they fit all kinds of situations." (?)You are not brought up as an economist, material economist, but the field of industrial design used to question things: "What is a chair, what is it for? You know, "Why does it break down, why do people move on the chair, changing their position? Because of poor circulation, the chair has to allow for movement, It has to allow for the conditions that exist. We can't work outside of that field. If a guy says "What if something brand new happens?" You say "Like what?" "A meteor destroys the center of your city." Then we have to start over again. He wants to know what you do under those conditions. It's the only thing you can do. Does that make sense? So the question "What will children learn in the future?" All things related to that time and to meet the needs that the questions that the kids would ask will have to meet those needs. And then, of course, there'll be a time when the kids walk away from that situation. And other kids ask them "What did you learned today?" And you can check them out by how accurate their descriptions are. In other words, to be a news reporter today, you can do what you want to do with the news, you can manipulate it, but in the future, an event occurs and a person reports on the event. Do you know what does that means? You have a person reporting an event (?) that occurs. A kid comes back and says "The man got up early, in the morning a bear approached him, and he used a deflector of this kind to detract the attention of the bear", but he can't add anything, that he picked up the shovel and probably try to use that to keep the bear away from him, no speculation. But when you speculate, all articles will be speculation on the origin of (?) It will always tell you when a person is projecting probable cause. It will always say at the head of the article that "This is a speculation by Dr. Jones and Dr. Philip (?) who speculate that this would have occurred do to that, but this is under speculation. Then it (?)gives findings, that's very different, what we found to occur, or what certain people attribute certain thing to, but it will always put that way. Do you have any questions, (?) what people will be taught, the adults will be updated constantly, they will no longer play cards, or sit at a table playing cards, because that only improves their ability to play cards. Playing chess would do nothing than improve your ability to play chess. The chess games of the future will be on a map, and they'll move objects where malaria is dominant, so when they'll get through moving these objects they'll know that South Africa has a higher incidence of malaria than North Africa. Do you know what I mean? By moving things. Just like a chess game, only it will be about the world and about what we know. They'll be no games that children play, except prefabrication of assembly systems. Can you go into like the everyday example of what kids will do, or how they'll learn or where'll they go or... That's up to them, by going to where they have questions. They are (?) tours; some tours are about transportation systems. Other tours are agronomy, other tours are geological formations. Whatever the kid picks, he wants to know about. Its best to teach him when he formulates a question, or she. Boys and girls are treated the same way, not separate. They use the same washrooms when they're very young. Do you see classrooms like they have today? No, not at all, I see discussion more like we have here. (?)Only kids taken out into the real world, from seed to plant. And they're not given any word like purpose, except the things that man makes. The purpose of the bow and arrow was devised as a mechanism. Instead of clubbing the animal, you had distance advantage, you could launch the bow and arrow, you could launch the arrow before the animal got close to you. The javelin required closer encounters, and you could see that the development of the gun or a rifle was really not intended to be an equalizer, but it took the big guy and the little guy and gave them equal killing power. But when the big guy used to fight, he used to pick up the little guy and throw him around. So they always wanted big men in the army, upfront, so they could pick up the little guys, the gun was the equalizer. It made everybody equal, that is to the killing. Killing was the only means they had in the old days, or enslavement, is get people to do work that other people didn't want to do, so people were enslaved. And also if you can get people to like the state of slavery, you were very much in demand. If you say "I'm honored to serve king (?)", they like you. But if you say "I don't like to serve that son of a bitch", you become troublesome and they whip you until you say "I'm going to serve anybody you tell me to serve." That's forced. If you can raise kids to want to serve in the army, to want to serve the political system, that's much easier, then having to wrestle with everybody and their different values. "You should be appreciative of your leaders, they're working on your behalf." But if you say "Look leaders work for their own concepts, they don't give a shit about you." If you do that you'll lose control of people. If you're honest, they keep using the word "being honest". How honest can you be? You know, it's ridiculous, but if you're equipped to live in a given environment you're better equipped or as well equipped as the next person. Will subject matter will be taught that is less relevant? Only if it's in the probability of occurrence such as if in times past, if the Russians came over from Canada, or they came over from South America, then you have to have special contingencies department that work on the military systems, but military systems are very crude, because they have nothing to do with conditioning, they have little to do with making the world a better place, except for those in control. So, I would say, to an extent, other ideas will be discussed, but they're within the realm of probability, not just anything. What if a guy doesn't like somebody and wants to kill him? But how in the hell did he get to be that way? Somewhere down the line he was a misfit and this shows up. When a kid, you can see it right right away, because all children tend to go rowing, if you put them in a row boat, they'll row it, if you want competition for speed they will row against on another but rarely will you find a kid that goes by himself unless he's born with horns or looks very different then other kids, then he'd be studied. You know what I mean by abnormal formation of a person may invite behavior, that's very different, but we know that. We know how to deal with it. If a guy says "What if you don't know how to deal with it?" Then you can't deal with it, what do you suggest? What if things that you don't know how to solve? Then you're going to have problems. (?) "Alright, then what do you suggest?" Always bring that up. "Well I don't know but you can't make a perfect world, that's what I'm trying to say. We're not trying to make a perfect world, we're trying to make a more adequate environment. Is that clear? Yes? Today they group people with age in schools, is it that type of thing in the future as well? No, they will group people in terms of values, that's automatic. Like a guy says "Would I have to live next door to a black African?" He doesn't want to live next door to you either. (?) people will want to live where they'll want to live during the transition. I'm talking about in education, it's very regimented with everybody a certain age and classrooms. No, whatever they're ready for, whatever age, there's no such thing as age classification. Except in terms as probability of physical disorders like rheumatism, arthritis may be related to age and breaking down of the body. They'll have a lot of charts on that. And they'll have a lot of counter-measures that are... In other words, the diet of people 65 and over will be varied as they age. Because the body can't handle certain things, the physiologist will be working on that. But since there's no sales or profit, they have no reason to emphasize any particular school of thought. Except what we know, or we don't know. And there's nothing wrong with a person saying: "I don't know." You don't look down on him, he just doesn't have enough information to make a decision, or arrive at a decision which is better than making a decision. Do you know the difference between arriving at a decision and making a decision? Arriving means you put it to test, you try watering plants ten times a day Does it grow any faster or larger? No, but it consumes more water than necessary. So you have to find out what the ideal mixture of fertilizer is for given plant, you don't keep fertilizing, will the plant grow larger than everything in nature, if you use more fertilizer? No, it may kill it. So you have to determine all those things, and those things you have difficulty determining, you put more people on it. And if a task is undesirable, let's say during the transition, we have to clean up radioactive material, well, you'll be put in the vehicle that's sealed so you're not poisoned by the radioactive material. And if you operate that vehicle, you operate it for two hours a day. You vary the incentive. If we (?)do need people to do dirty work, say coal mining, you work two hours a day three days a week. You vary the incentives, do you know what I mean? So you can get anybody to do any job if they want a lot of time to themselves. But ultimately, people want the freedom to do what they're inclined to do in the new society. Do you know what I mean by inclined to do? They have no natural propensities and the new society will offer a very broad range of, you use the word choice, many options, and the options that you pick have to deal with your state of health and the people who you associate with. Yes? No one will say: "My options are better than yours." That type of conversation will disappear. Or "I can run faster than you", what's your point? What do you mean? Where are you getting at? You know that's an old world stuff, and if you meet people from the old world you'll understand, instead of getting angry at them, you'll understand that you don't want to bother with him or you do, that's up to you. And the tougher the job meaning the older the values. And the older the values, the more difficult it is to change. Do you understand why? Because (?)old values provide a way of life, a way of reacting in the environment without thinking about it, you just automatically react, so the old values are harder to change, because there's no fundamentals you can point to. You can say to a bridge engineer if you use rivets it will be stronger or if you use welding it will the strongest. (?)That there's a referent there, always, but in the old days the guys says "Believe me, I'll make it strong." Well, that's something you can't use unless they identify what they're talking about. Okay? You won't have to sell people on anything in the future, they'll ask: "What does that camera do that the cameras previous to that didn't do?" It automatically focuses, it automatically allows for light, dispersion, you know? It automatically records that which is relevant, and doesn't record that which is not relevant. If you have a meeting and you had microphones, when somebody brought a question: "What if I don't want to live with that guy?" It's not even recorded, the guys knows where to go. After he gets through asking questions they know what where to send him. Do you understand what that means? By the question a person asks they know what they need. If a person says: "How can I make plants grow faster?" He's interested in the theory he's interested in Agronomy, he's interested in those factors related to rapid plant growth and nutrition. So, the question asked would be pretty much relevant. I can't imagine after the transition kids asking unusual questions. I can't imagine that. Any questions about that? As you understand as they get older, as new ideas come out, new inventions, they would be updated, updated means if they can't visualize, there'll be animation to show them how things go together. Show them how seeds take nutrients in and how circulation occurs in plants, all that will be animated, rather then saying the plant takes fluid from the roots, it will be animated. Do you understand? To give them a visual concept, because they can't always imagine how a plant operates. They'll be shown how babies have (?)nutrients from their mother, through the umbilical cord. They'll be shown that your children are not necessarily like you. They may look like you, but they're not any real different than other children, unless you have a physical disability, a hereditary physical disorder or gene damage. And if there's gene damage, I think they could be detected very early in the future. Because people are concerned; they don't want a person to come in with the last stages of cancer, saying "I have a terrible headache, and I had it for months." " - Did you go for a medical check-up? - No." That's why in the future they will be very few surprises. Do you think you know what I mean, by that? You only get surprised when a person says, "Well, maybe this will go away, I'll wait a month before I go to the doctor." Those decisions are made by purchasing power or they're made by other obligations, "I have to attend my son's graduation, I don't want to be hospitalized now." Do you understand? The options of the future are very different. So if you say: "Well, I can't imagine anyone behaving in variance with the future, can you?" If they're brought up in that kind of environment. I can't imagine a form of aberrant behavior unrelated to the environment. I can't imagine it. Do you want to go over any education in terms of like transition where all the problems will be? The transition is the problem area, where different methods will be tried. A film that will move people in the South is not the same film that would move people in Maine, so you'll have to study how people learn in different areas. And then you'll have to learn how to take the biproducts of this culture such as gangs that beat up gays, or beat up Lutherans or Catholics because they're brought up not to like them. You'll have to learn how you work with those kids. Now, it something like this: say there's five children and you bring in a aberrated kid into that system. Once the aberrated kid becomes normal to the new environment you release, first we're going to bring the new kid in. The kid is always put into an environment like, if one kid says "Hey, let's get building a (?)hot tub, he's asleep (?) The other kids say "We don't see any fun in that." In other words, he's not around the kind of kids that say "Hey, that's a good idea." Where the hell do they come from? They're all aberrated. So you have to take aberrated kids and put them in a less aberrated environment where kids in the new environment have abilities that they admire. They can lift more weight, they can get that ball in the basket, they have to have qualities that the kids identify with. "You're smart, I'll listen to you." But if they have qualities such as Mathematics, Chemistry, those are not qualities normal people will identify with so you first have to have identification. People will not fall in line in an area, even though people are more intelligent, they call them geeks or whatever it is. Because as long as they associate with the old world, they will tend to preserve that, because that's their identity. If you take away their identity of a person, they will fight back. So the people in the new environment must have identification with the kids coming in, otherwise it won't work. If a person says "Well how do you know it won't work?" Well, take musical people put them in line with non musical people, it doesn't work. We know a lot of things that work, but we don't have the sanity yet to apply it, or we use: "Don't you see how foolish you are to make that statement?" When you talk that way it operates under the assumption of the magic of words, that words can turn people around. Words are sounds we make that affect the behavior of people and the values of people. If you make the wrong sounds you don't get the right reactions, that is the reactions you expected. But in the future the Science of Communication will be more like Behavioral Engineering making sounds that produce different type of behavior. I think monkeys make sounds when a tiger comes into the environment, they churp or they make certain sounds and all the other monkeys make those sounds. Well that's fortunate, they make different sounds in different conditions. Language, a lot of the sounds we make are projected, we assume, that's how by telling a person clearly: "Don't do that!" that's going to stop them from doing that. That's not conditioning, language is not conditioning unless they're conditioned to language. Who makes the decisions as to what branch of research will be done? The nature of the problems. Is that clear? The nature of the problems determine what has be done. Now, how do you know what system is the best? How well it works. If the new system is installed and it works it's used. If it works in certain areas you indicate it works in limited areas. We don't know enough about it. (?) If you want a plastic that can take impact and stretch and compression, you have to specify what those qualities are. Otherwise you can't do research in it. And there's no contest that you made a metal with bigger memory than his metal. Nobody gives a damn, but they will like you to share your ideas with him, so that he learns more about what you are doing. There's no more: "That's my idea". Do you understand what I mean? I've tried a lot of different systems, I lived in hobo camps, I use the word "hobo" because that's the word they use, but they were just like ordinary people. They had their own point of view. I met a young kid in Grand Central Station, he must have been thirteen years old, I was about fourteen, and he said, he had a suit, he was well dressed, he had a wallet, lots of money, and he said: "Would you like to be comfortable and have a lot of money?" I said, "Well what do you do?" He says: "I wait for queers in the station, then I go home with the queer, and when he goes down on his knees to blow me, I hit him in the chin and knock him out, and steal everything and he doesn't report it to the police, because he's queer, so that's how I come (?) alright." He was brought up to hate queers, to think they're abnormal and it doesn't matter if you kill him, or rob him or whatever you do. But they don't understand that a Lutheran is a queer, or a Catholic. A Seven Day Adventist is queer to a Jew. Everybody is queer to somebody else, but it's not free will that makes a person queer. It's the environment they're reared in. If you get more understanding for older people, if you only associate with older people, and they inform you far better, you're going to seek out older people. They say: "Well the trouble with Larry is he likes older people only." Now, (?)older people reinforce him, younger people do not, so become queer for older people. Do you understand what I mean? But if you get mad at them, you don't understand the effects of environment on behavior. So if you have any questions, specifics, now is the time to bring them up. If you play these tapes, it works on area by area. So the next time we get together we'll cover different areas, "how to generate (?) original thinking", what they call original thinking. Original thinking is asking relevant questions, that's what it means. Irrelevant questions: "Why did that guy beat up his grandmother?" "Because he hates his grandmother." That doesn't tell you a fucking thing. Doesn't (?) say you why he beat her up or anything. His values are so aberrated it doesn't even pay to deal with that aspect of language. So we have to talk about revising our methods of looking at things. And what about natural methods? Natural methods take too long, it may take two hundred years or three generations for people to come around to better thinking. Do you understand what I mean? Well (?) if he's a member of the Klu Klux Klan, you can't come around in a week and a half. It might come around in three months, if the information put forth meets with your methods of evaluation.

Video Details

Duration: 1 hour and 24 minutes
Year: 2012
Country: United States
Language: English
Producer: The Venus Project
Director: The Venus Project
Views: 3
Posted by: ltiofficial on Feb 18, 2016

TVP Teamspeak Q&A Seminar - Education - 2012-04-01

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.