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 - 2012-06-10 - Mechanistic Concept (part 2)

0 (0 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
The Venus Project TeamSpeak seminar June 10th, 2012. Hi, everyone, I appreciate you coming today and I don't know if someone was going to moderate but I guess will get started. We're playing the second half of "Mechanistic Concept" and I think that also includes, let me check the box here, "Subjective Behavior" so you'll get some of that in there too. So I guess we can start with that and then will take the questions. Thanks again, everyone. Sometimes you get people say: "There's not enough feelings and emotion in what Jacque says" or something. That's true, there isn't, but if you are emotionally attached to something it means that you're subjective. There are people that nail a piece of wood together, then they kiss it, before that they don't kiss it, until you nail it so it looks like a cross, then you kiss it. So what was the day before? It was a cross, two pieces of wood, or some copper that wasn't cast in a form of a cross, And the cross is a crucifix, which was long before people wore it, it was to crucify people. So it's a symbolic depending what country you come from. That's why I can't accept anything except the sciences, the shape of an airplane wing is designed for certain lift, the shape of the plane is designed for certain conditions. When I say you can't exceed your environment, that means you can't exceed what you've been exposed to. You can't, if somebody gave you a brand new microscope and you say: "The objective lenses are insufficient" if you're a cannibal. Do you know what I mean? If you give a cannibal a watch, he doesn't look at it and say: "The gears are not precise, they're ten thousand of an inch off." He can't say that, that's what I mean by a person can't exceed their environment. If you got an airplane, if you're able to, two thousand years from now, a guy might look at our plane and say "I'll never get into that crate." Our airplanes would come through as a crate or something else, but certainly, if you're born two thousand years from now, you couldn't have sane values and survive. The nation that can't exceed it's own environment will be surpassed, do you know what that means? Another country will surpass us. If China can't get pass where they're at, if they stop and just take in manufacturing and don't go into automation and modification, they will remain. There are many nations out there that are so primitive, they do things the way they did a thousand years ago and that's up the Amazon river. The natives build rafts the same way they did a thousand years ago, no change. They bundle reed together, tie it all together, because that's all they ever see, they never leave the area, so, if you say: "They're stupid." No, they're not. They live in a fixed environment where things are fairly uniform and not enough change. They don't have visitors from other tribes that bring them other things, otherwise they might be brought up to hate other tribes, or they might be brought up to trade. The nations that trade undergo change because they meet people that are different and they get things that are different. No nation all developed a vase. If a nation all developed a vase and your nation didn't and they show you how they carry water or orange juice around (?) you don't have any means except this way, so you undergo change. The more nations that meet and share ideas, not just meet, if they share ideas they undergo modification. But if my people undergo too much modification, I can't control them, so I put a fence around my country and keep out foreign ideologies. Well, if books come into my country that change people so I can't control them, I forbid pornography, or whatever it is, I forbid. Am I right, am I wrong? All nations wish to survive, they can't if people read different kind of books, different kind of characters, different kind of social systems, you can't control your people, so you say: "Well, I live in democracy." Nobody believes in democracy, they believe in what they've been conditioned to believe in. They can't believe in democracy, otherwise they'd go (?) Communism, Socialism, Free Love,(?) They'd say: "I don't know enough to make up my mind which is right," they'd speak like that, I don't know enough about it, do you understand what I'm saying? I'm upsetting the apple cart so there are no values, except the values that preserve nature, man and his relationship to his fellow man and nature. This is the only laws I know of. If we don't take care of the forests, we let them burn and die, we will suffer. If we pollute the oceans, we will suffer. Those are the things I accept. I don't know of any other system. Will they do that in the future? I think they'll control things in the future. Weather, hurricanes, earthquakes, everything. Man will learn to control things in his behalf. The other organisms that he keeps alive will be supportive to that culture, do you understand that? That's why it will be very difficult to deal with people that come from another planet with a different gravitational field, different lighting systems. If they develop they don't have to look like us, whatever they develop, they'd be reflecting their culture. So a guy says: "I'd like to share ideas with you." Well, only if they lived here and they had all kinds of method of evaluation, but they wouldn't want to associate with us, because we're too limited, if they've been around longer. So, I can't say that Fresco says the truth, I can only say that Fresco's world is based upon survey related to man and his relationship to the environment. That's what I mean by mechanistic. Because I asked a writer of a scientific book: "Do you think man is a machine?" "That's the old mechanistic point of view that man is a machine." He didn't say: "What do you mean by machine?" There were no semantics at the time to know what the man is talking about. By machine I mean that the eyes cannot move to that position unless there's a muscle that pulls it there, unless there's a mechanism in the brain, (?)or a bright light cause the eye to look at it. So if I want to make little dolls with (?)little magnets in there that you don't see, if I hold the magnet there, the eyes will focus on it, if I move, but not really, normal people will think: "Gee, the machine is looking at(?) wherever you hold that." I can simulate that. You can make a machine to have facial expressions and sympathy. You say: "I bought a new car and I lost it, I forgot to put the breaks on. "The machine eyes will change, will say: "Oh my god, I'm so sorry to hear that," but it won't feel anything. It will react as though it felt something. A machine can't feel bad or good, about you it can only react to the way its circuits are built. Do you understand that? That's why a machine will never say: "I'm going to take over", because it doesn't have ambition. It doesn't say: "Your wife is prettier than mine," or that machine looks nicer than the other machine, it has no such reaction, nor can it be given that, no matter how you circuit a machine, it can say that: "That machine is rusting and it's going to disintegrate" and it can even cry, but it won't feel anything. It's like a movie of an actor doing and you know that he didn't loose his wife and he didn't get shot although it got shot it the movie. A movie he can't feel, he can simulate feel and that's why a person says: "He's a good actor", meaning he can get you to cry, or she can get you to cry, say: "They're good actors." And sometimes people use that in marrying a rich man, a girl might say: "You're so wonderful, I love you," and the rich man feels flattered and he marries her, then she spends a lot of money on a lot of things. That's simulating love. A prostitute that says: "You're a lousy lay" after the day is over, you won't come back. She says: "I really enjoyed that sex(?)", you know. After all there are people who simulate good and bad, right and wrong. Knowing the difference is difficult, if they're good at it. A salesman who sells you something simulates being your friend, "Let me advise you that the Ford car is better built than ay car today, believe me, I'm doing you a favor." Is he a car salesman or a fireman, you know, what is he? If he's a salesman and a church Gower that believes in God, he says: "A Chevy is best if you live in ruff terrain, or a Jeep would be better than a Chevy", that's an honest guy, he says: "That's what I know about cars," but a person can't work for General Motors and say: "Get yourself an Italian car." I bought a Tatra which was a Czechoslovakian car, do you know the Tatra? I bought it and a mechanic said: "I'm not going to work on your car, it's from a communist country." He said that to me. I said: "is there a Communist shit or a Greek shit, or a Greek pain or Communist pain?" There's no such thing as Communist science, or Czechoslovakian science There's only science. And they call people scientists that are not generalists, that are in one field. He's an optical scientist, he knows how to (?)grind lenses, but he's not a Scientist. To me a Scientist is one who is interested in everything, has loyalty to methodology. That means, if a Greek comes up with the cure for cancer, you honor him. If a Japanese guy comes up with the cure for (?)cancer, you honor him. you honor any human being worthy of honor. But you don't honor only your own kind. "He was an American, that's what I liked about him." Patriotism pulls a shield up in front of us so we can't see things as they are. We can't even hear the differences of nations, we get mad at them if they don't uphold American values or our concepts of freedom and democracy. We get mad at people and that's what they want you to do, they want you to have loyalty to what they teach, but if you have loyalty to methodology, you get rid of a fountain pen if it leaks and you buy a ballpoint pen, because no matter where it was invented if it works better than the other pen, you use it. If Filipinos (?)come up with a new type of glass that gives you better vision, you use it. You honor them, but you don't say: "I hope a Greek did it because I'm Greek". That would be blinding yourself. I don't like traditional Jews or traditional Catholics, or traditional Americans, or any traditional group, but not because they're Filipinos, because of their values and the values they pick up. So if you discriminate, I don't want to live next door to a Klansman because he says: "Let's go out and beat up a Jew, or a Nigger or a Filipino, or any damn foreigner." I don't find that fulfilling. I find that to be limited viewpoint. Racial prejudice is like patriotism toward a certain race: "I'm a Greek and I'm proud of it." Once you do that you damage a person. Say: "I'm a Greek and I certain Greeks and certain Filipinos and certain Blacks and certain Italians." If you meet Italian gangsters you say: "Italians are gangsters", that's when you're projecting one set of values into all Italians. If you don't understand what I'm saying, you have to read more on different cultures and different times to get to understand that the Romans behaved like Romans because they've been brought up in a Roman environment and the Seminoles behaved like Seminoles because they're brought up in an Seminole environment. No Indian ever said, no Seminole Indian ever said: "I want a twin engine Beechcraft, unless they were sent to our schools." You get too little of this information, when you go out into the world you get sucked in the worldly values, but if you get pass a certain point, you'll never go back. I (?) this: "There are no roads to yesterday", unless it's a history book. It isn't a road to yesterday, it's about yesterday. Do you know what I mean by "roads to yesterday"? If you've grown out of yesterday. There are people that live yesterday today. They won't buy an electric fan because it's unnatural, but they wear eyeglasses and they wear clothing which is unnatural and shoes which is unnatural. So there are too many contradictions. The average person is a bundle of contradictions, that's why they need guidance, psychiatry, psychology as guides, but the psychiatrists themselves don't know what shapes certain behavior. So they're always experimenting on people, they're doing the wrong thing, they should be studying the environment that makes them that way, not the people. By looking into the brain you can't see a mathematician, you can't (?)visualize creativity, all you'll see is blood vessels running up feeding certain nerves, but you can't see anything. By studying the brain you can learn: "This regions has to do with hearing, this region has to do with sympathy", You can do that by showing a person things and measuring the brain activity in different areas. This area is visual, this area is intellectual, you know? This area is temporal but you can't tell whether is good, bad, right or wrong. An animal with big eyes has a lot of associations in the back of the brain, they're visual. An animal that's sniffing all the time makes all its decisions based on smell: "There's food in that area up north", you know? He turns around. An animal with movable ears has a temporal association in the region of hearing, because they depend on sound and some animals depend on sight, like a chicken hawk has most of his brain associations in the back of the head, the occipital lobe. I don't know if I mentioned to you this before, but a chicken hawk can see a dime from the top of the Empire State Building, he can identify a dime. Human beings need a three foot object to identify, so when you say: "Humans are more evolved than other animals," you're talking through your hat. You say: "Not in vision", a chicken hawk can see more detail than we can, another animal can sense another animal by smell a mile away. No human can do that. So when you say: "Humans are evolved in certain areas," this is better then saying human beings exceed all other animals, not true. A dog, for example, can smell cancer, did you know that on people? So they use dogs now. How they do that, they hold up a cancer first and the dog smells it, then it will stop at a region that has that smell. So, a lot of medics are using dogs or they do this: "how does a dog smell cancer?" and they'll make a mechanism with (?)particular matter moving pass the fan, and then an electric field in there and if it moves up a certain level it's how the dog smells cancer. You don't want dogs that smell cancer, you want to find out how dogs smell cancer. People also used dogs to find people in an earthquake. They can smell people, we can't. There's debris all over the place so we dig all over rather than making a sensor to smell human beings, that's what's needed, not dogs. So, stating the problem is very difficult, they think that you dig here, you dig there, you'll find a person. That's not stating the problem, that's stating the problem you have. But stating the problem is making a machine that sniffs and can smell people trapped in an earthquake. Anyway, that ought to give you some perspective of the world you live in. Okay, thanks for playing that, Joe. The first question here is part two so I think I'll go down to part one, if it relates. Let's say scarce resources are used in medication to keep certain people alive due to a lack of information to cure these diseases. This resource is scarce enough that it cannot be distributed to all those who need it to survive. I guess the question is: "How will we decide how the algorithm interprets who to distributes this to? Who decides this ultimate factor? Don't forget that the resource distribution logic is man made and man thought, it isn't some... go ahead you can answer that. Yes, I think I can attempt to answer it. It isn't who decides, is how do they make the decisions, what do they use as the yard stick, not who, it's how do they arrive at the decision? So if you use the Earth as a resource system you'll have to do a survey of what kind of resources the Earth has and what their shortages are. And do we have the kind of knowledge to overcome shortages? If we don't we have to restrict the use of materials. If you find out that a certain area has very little water in the ground and very little rain, you don't build a farm there unless you have a newer method of arriving at decisions. So we arrive at decisions, we don't make decisions. You build a motor or a turbine and you find out how much power it generates, but you have to do work to find out, you don't have an opinion about anything until you've done a study and if other scientists do the same study, they have to arrive at the same value system. They have to use the same values and have to arrive at similar conclusions. Again, it is not who makes the decisions, is how they go about arriving at a decision. And if there's a scarce resource such as some medical resource that's needed? Then the resource labs will be given an assignment that we need a certain type of physical-chemical reaction, "Go to work on it." We will give labs whatever they need to do a given job. Today they dig up nickels and dimes for research in cancer, heart disease, mental disorders. In the future we give up whatever the hell they need, an electron microscope or two. Whatever they need to do the job. You no longer base it on scarcity or trying to raise money to do a given job. That's socially offensive. Okay you said a couple of weeks ago about not being able to turn around your brother to these ideas, what happened to your sister and other family members also? That was for you. Yes, that was a long time ago. My brother wanted to be a bit player in motion pictures. That's what he wanted, he had nothing else in his head, he never read any other books, therefore I could not reach him, I was not as skilled at the time. I was also not as skilled to reach my sister. It was a long time ago before my value system had grown and became more confident at presenting new ideas. But even in that time you did have a group of kids that you've did turned around quite a bit. The kids that I did turned around were interested in science to start with, so that they had better tools and I was not super skilled in the old days, but apparently I was able to reach the kids interested in science. In a technologically opened and advanced society it seems that the cultural change... how does The Venus Project aim to enhance people's cultures and increase individuality? What happens to indigenous people and age-old cultures? They are given the opportunity to go to school and if they accept that opportunity, they undergo change, if they don't accept that opportunity, they remain where they're at. That would be what you call individual preference, which is shaped by their culture. You can go to Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church, Seven Day Adventist, it depends on your major influences, which church you accept. I seems a document on National Geographic about a gene that contributes in aggressive behavior, this contradicts with Jacque's view on behavior. What do you think? Well, I would say that when the geneticists said they're looking for the Republican gene, that was enough for me to pull away from it. Republicans are conditioned by environment and they select their point of view because that's what they've been exposed to mostly and they have never been exposed to certain views which contradict that. People that want to keep you uniformed in certain areas, will give you a philosophy that supports their point of view, just like a patriotic American, or a patriotic German, or a patriotic Russian. They're people that have been fed value systems that support that culture. Aggression depends on where you're coming from, if you come from a scarcity environment you tend to prize certain things that are scarce. If you come from a scientific environment you say: "I wonder if I can reproduce that in nature. If I can reproduce it or make soil, to return soil to its productive capacity without adding synthetic or artificial flavoring or chemicals", they do that. Scientific research is a way of overcoming scarcity and making all things available to all people. That's the ultimate aim of science, to be able to reproduce that which is scarce and make it available for everyone. There's someone else want to deal with this question, get a chance to answer: "How will global overpopulation be dealt with?" - I can take a shot. -Sure, go ahead. When it comes to global overpopulation we need to understand two things: we need to understand that we are looking at from today's perspective. Today's perspective is this: we have a lot of people that do not have education, that do not believe in contraception, that actually do believe that having a lot of kids is either luck or beneficial to them or they do need it in a certain areas because of conditions basically. A lot of babies die at birth. When there's a resource-based economy established, people get educated and they do understand the benefits of contraception, and understand that basically that bringing other people into this world, they need to take care of their own kids, and etcetera, etcetera. There's a specific thing which I would like to add to that and that is that in today's society, if we all lived like any major movie star or any, I would say, a large consumerist such as Paris Hilton or anybody that's really spending a lot of things, a lot of money on things that they don't really need, technically 1,8 billion people could live on Earth. But if we all lived I wouldn't say humble, I would say optimal, then the world can sustain a lot more than we are today in terms of population size. (?)The decision making, if people decide forty people on a boat that can only carry twenty, it will sink. So the laws arrived at by scientists are based upon test systems only and if you put a thing to test, you can say like it does in theatres, where no more than 300 people on the balcony, if you put more people there it threatens the structure of the balcony. They know that by testing it, by not using people but they use sandbags and weights to see what a structural system can support, then they give you a report on what that system can support, it's not just a bunch of ideas that people come up because it's (?). In the future they arrive at decisions, they don't make decisions before testing a system. The overpopulation question is a very, very long and in-depth question and answer session, you have to understand many different factors and I'll try to put it simply is that such a large equation with so many variables that it is not an easy answer to give variables of. While the Earth can sustain (?)seven billions right now, because it is, so we have a baseline to work from. Then you have to factor in what is their standard of living, then you have to factor in an accurate measurement of the Earth's resources, then you have to factor in the efficient usage of those resources and distribution and the equation goes on and on and on and on and you have to understand each part of that equation to get a more accurate generalized final answer and I've done some basic math on it and it is, I estimate much, much, much higher sustainability than we have now, I'm talking in the hundreds of billions, not that we need to have our Earth population at that. When the world is aware and when we know what the population is and when we know if we have (?)higher population on Earth our overall standard of living will go down, people will tend to make decisions to not have children instead of having children. So, there's just a lot to it and really hard to answer in such a short time period. - Thank you. - Thanks, Shawn. How can we teach compassion, sympathy and empathy in children? By cooperative work where people work with one another and they realize that, well if you try to build a log cabin yourself, if you tried to build a house many years ago it might take you six months to put up a log cabin, but if you work with your neighbor and several neighbors join in, you can put up the log cabin in a much shorter time. So children are brought up in cooperative environment rather than each individual for himself. So seeing the advantages of a cooperative environment will induce children to look for advice from many different people. For example, my young boy when he was about ten or twelve he said to me: "Daddy what makes an airplane fly, is it the propeller?" "If the engine doesn't turn over, the propeller doesn't turn." He said: "Is it the engine?" "No if you don't put fuel in that engine it won't work. "- Is it the fuel? - No, if there's no oxygen, the fuel won't combust. It's many interactive variables that enables an airplane to fly, not any one thing or two things." Okay, what governments are interested in The Venus Project so far? No, we're not dealing with any governments so far. Most governments are made of similar people, that have political ambitions, and political ambitions are false. Because listen to TV, listen to what the Democrats say about the Republicans and what the Republicans say about the Democrats, they lie about each other, they're not scientific. No politician to my knowledge has ever increased the agricultural yield, made airplanes any safer, or made highways safer, or diminished automobile accidents. They don't know how is what I'm trying to get across. The people you elect to political office are stupid beyond description. They try to solve problems by making laws, or they try to solve problems my military methods. That's the wrong way to go. You have to learn how to bridge the difference between nations and bring all nations together working in a common direction of alleviating cancer, heart disease and common problems to all people, that's what the nations of the future will work on, problems common to all people, not military solutions. Who decides what movies to get to show in the cinemas? The movies that are tested that produce non-racism, that eliminates racism, eliminated aggression, eliminates unhealthy human aggression and movies that promote the well being of all people not a selected few. Anyone want to take this next one? What will prevent those people in the seat of power, programmers, managers, etcetera from corruption or swinging things in their favor? - I would like to try this one. - Go ahead. This question was partially answered with how we can teach compassion, empathy with children, so when we raise children that way so they would be compassioned, would be cooperative in the cooperative environment, they also will be brought up in a system which eliminates scarcity. When you don't have scarcity, you don't have to get and maintain the position of differential advantage. When everything is available to you, everything in abundance, you don't even have a thought to acquire something more than what you use. You can use almost everything and everything will be available to you and in the same time every other part of the system will be interconnected with others so, if you purposely will try to brake something in one part of the system it will affect you right away, for example, even if a programmer or an engineer or any person would have solar panels on the roof, it doesn't make any sense to hack the own electric grid, it doesn't take you anywhere so, it will be senseless to actually even think about to seize the power, it's not going to be stimulated or it will not have any sense to actually even think about to, take an advantage position in that system because when other people get more availability to resources, when children get proper education, the richer you are, the more advanced the society as a whole. Okay, thanks. They will be no people who are in a powerful position. All decisions are made by what people need. The amount of water you store in a given village has to meet the population's demand. You have to have supermarkets in certain areas that meet the demands of the population. There is no decision makers that can keep you from advancing, there's no one that can keep you from being educated. Everyone can go to any school or university without any fees. There's no taxations and no money in The Venus Project therefore all things are open, the Earth now belongs to all people and resources are available to all nations and all the artificial boundaries that separate people will eventually be removed if we are to survive. If we don't do that we will hurt the environment and maybe injure one another. I just want to add to that too that The Venus Project has a set direction, the agendas are already set forth in terms of our goals, you know you can read that in our book in terms of common heritage, the wellbeing of all people rather than just a select few, system's approach to acquiring goods and services to everyone, no elitism, so it just becomes, and more, but it just becomes a procedural system in terms of how you arrive at that. First we need to understand where the resources are, the survey committee is put into place to do that and then in order to carry out the aims and directions of food, housing, clothing, an appropriate environment to enable resources to go further in terms of city design and the way we do things, then there is nobody per se in charge of anything, it's a procedure of how to carry those things out. How will the mentally ill be dealt with? Well, first of all there will be no fees involved. The person will be dealt with in terms of MRI, X-rays or whatever has to be done to determine whether it's brain damage or actually environmental exposure with erroneous value systems. If it's erroneous value systems they can be corrected, if it's brain damage, it may take some form of brain implant to overcome the insufficiency. And everybody will be treated very well, because you never know when you might get brain damage and could destroy your eyes or your speech or you might get heart disease, they'd be treated like everyone else who was ill and enable them to function as much as possible. How will crime be dealt with example, killing and rape? All that is learned in your culture. The movies that you see, the war movies, "revenge is sweet" in the Bible, all that is learned. When you raise children in an environment that's constructive and sharing ideas, they have no attitudes about hurting one another, this only comes from a person that's brought up in an environment where pain and injury and attack serves in that environment. It serves no purpose in The Venus Project to hurt anyone. And people who carry on those acts have been abused terribly throughout life, there are reasons why they do that and you look for the environmental conditions that cause people to do that and you eliminate those conditions. Whenever there's hunger and scarcity, crime goes up, so you can correlate that with the system. Some people think that some people are just criminals. There's no such thing. Tomorrow's world will consider all the Supreme Court judges as criminals, all politicians as criminals because they lie continuously and they can produce nothing. They cannot produce jobs, the only thing that can produce jobs is increase in purchasing power of the majority of people and they'll buy things, but no politicians can increase jobs, if you understand that. People have to have money to buy things and that will sustain the culture. If they're laid off or you ship jobs off to China because they work for less, then you have a mass of people that don't have the purchasing power to sustain a monetary system. And we also have tremendous aberrant value systems that are taught where people can think their way out of anything, practically anything so it just becomes, violence becomes more prevalent within this society. Will recording studios, or film studios be available for people to make songs and films? Yes, everyone will have opportunity to write stories, make films, because all that (?)stuff will be accessible to anyone and if you make a film, it's run in the community and if they like it, it goes on to other communities. If they don't identify with it, they point out what it is they don't identify with and the producer of the film has to write, to (?) his ideas or her ideas as to what would make a film better, what will help humanity, this is always determined by the final result of the film. Jacque, do you feel that they're any genes responsible for value orientated behavior? I think the genes determine the color of the eyes, maybe the shape of the body, maybe some propensities toward certain diseases, but they do not give you values such as greed, hunger, hate, love, all that is based on the kind of environment you're brought up in. Really there's....when somebody tells you somebody is beautiful that's because that's his standards of your culture. In the Arab world or Africa people that look different look beautiful to the people brought up in that culture. The word "beauty" is purely subjective. And if you marry a very beautiful girl, or a very beautiful girl marries a very handsome guy and he turns out to be a son of a bitch, that face becomes ugly. Jacque, would you (?) setting up a group like you've done in the seventies with Sociocyberneering, discussing anything and everything, did you found it a helpful process to improve your own communication skills? Yes, I did find it helpful and I made a lot of what you call, I had a lot of shortcomings, I didn't know the best way of approach a problem so I went through all the areas before I arrived at a way that seems to get to most people. 90% of the people that come here walk out very different than when they arrived. They arrive as normal people, and when they leave they're very different and they keep thanking me for giving them a value system that enables them to cope with problems. I think what he might be asking is also, if I am not incorrect, do you feel that other people should set up groups like that to discuss things? Yes, I think you can learn a lot teaching other people things, but if you teach them about the scientific method, how scientists go about arriving at a decision, they have no idea, they think it just comes out of the scientist's head. He experiments, sometimes the makes a lot of things that don't work well, until he arrives at one that does. There's no such thing as a person sitting down and coming up with the answer. They have to experiment to determine the direction to be taken. How will people who don't work be dealt with? People that don't work, well do you mean that if a person is replaced by automation, or do you mean a person that doesn't want to work? - Say one that doesn't want to work. - Well, if the person who doesn't want to work you have to show him how people working in agriculture provide food for him and you have to indicate that the work of other people enables him to survive. Research, science gave us the electric light, but if you don't want to work it means you don't understand your relationship to humanity or the environment and we work on that person and try to give him or she what they lack. I think that that may be from this culture, remnants of an old culture. - Yes. - Work is never reinforced, it's practically never interesting it's just been monotonous and boring, something that people just hate to do, so in the future, what you'd call work are things that are really interesting that will help people and help society as a whole so you'd see the rewards immediately within the society and children would not have to have jobs that are boring and monotonous as well. Jacque, you've said once that you believed in the Illuminati on The Edge. It was an interview done in England, what did you want to say by that? - I don't recall ever admiring the Illuminati. - No, they said you've said you believed in it, do you believe that are people who want to control the world, or what? Oh, yes, there are people that would love to control the Internet, in fact eliminate a lot of it. But if they ever succeed, I feel sorry for the world's population. The Internet is one of the greatest devices ever made to free people from a fixed set of views. Is the collapse of recent Spain the start of a chain reaction for a global collapse? Yes, I believe that we are headed towards a global collapse, but that would be based upon taking on more machines in industry, producing things with less and less people, no more cashiers at the supermarket, automatic tabulation. When that happens the majority of people won't have the purchasing power to buy goods and services, and that's the end of the monetary system. You don't have to shoot anybody, you don't have to have a revolution, all systems die unless they change. If America can't see the future, other nations will pass us by. And we really don't feel that you can hasten it or you know, march in the streets and make change, or take your money out of the banks all at once, we're really not large enough for people to do that, to we make any particular change, so it is collapsing and you just have to stand back and watch it collapse while introducing a new value system and a new way of thinking and a new direction as (?)quickly as possible. Is not only happening in the United States, it's happening all over the world, but if you don't have an alternative system worked out, even the revolutionary people who get into power don't know exactly what to do to make the world a better place. The Venus Project provides the means and methods for attaining dynamic equilibrium, a changing society without any final frontiers. We are not utopian, we don't believe that you can design utopia, you can only design a better system than the one that exists. But several years from the time you put in a new system it will be constantly revised. So the future has no final frontiers. We have a few more minutes, is there anyone who likes to ask a question live? Yes, please if I can. Sure. Okay, first question is: do you see that eventually automation will produce global (?)cybernated organisms and how do you think people will live in symbiotic relationship with them? Well, don't you remember when people used to operate elevators? Now you get in and you press whatever floor you want to go to and it stops exactly there. You don't need to get mad at anybody. When you put in automation, if you go to any airport today, most of the train on every major airports are automated. There's no conductor, there's no operator of the train, it operates automatically and that's where the future is going, toward automation, where no one will do any work. They will learn scuba-diving, sailing and learn how to live and how to relate better with other people. They will travel and go back to school and study what they want to study, and this is the future that I'm talking about, one where you don't go to work. Work is boring it doesn't use your brains, when you work as a cashier, where you stand behind the counter in a department store, you don't really learn anything. So I'm saying that most jobs are boring, uninteresting and will be replaced by automation. Okay, thanks, and the second one: when you are describing communication it seems to me that only one way to really communicate is direct translation to the brain of all the thoughts, feelings and experiences. How do you see how we can communicate if we're not aware that and how can I test myself if I don't project my personal bias in the conversation? First you have to learn what the scientific method is and then you have to apply it to check out whether or not what you believe is true or not. You have to put it to test. Once you learn how to do that, you don't become a metaphysician, you don't walk off and say: What were the sign of the stars when you were born? I don't want to use pendulums or some sort of magic to try to arrive at decisions. That was good two hundred years ago, but today we can arrive at decisions by testing the strength of materials, by testing the strength of all kind of stuff, the safety of automobiles of whatever else you're working on. You'll be able to make cars much safer than they are today. Even if you dissect a brain you can't find where the thoughts are. Dissecting the brain only tells you what areas of the brain control different aspects of the body, the internal secretion, digestion, adrenalin glands that supply the energy you needed, but controlling the brain would only mean if the brain if you had a stroke and the area that controls the walking cycle was damaged, some day we would be able to put an implant in that can play the walking cycle to the brain so you can walk even though you, after you (?)haven't received much damage, they'll be able to put implants in, very tiny that will enable you to walk, or use your hands even though you were paralyzed by a stroke. What would your definition of real communication be? When you think about it the reason we communicate at all is to attempt to control the behavior of other people. You say: "Mother, I'm hungry" or "Will you get me a glass of water?" All those words are to control people. When you tell a girl how beautiful she is, you love it when she smiles, the dimple, the flow of her hair, you're only talking about personal gratification, you're not talking to the other person, you're using a technique for softening up operations so you can become more intimate with a person. We don't communicate today to share ideas, we communicate for control in most instances. The government never communicates, it tells you how to think about this country, and why it's so great. It doesn't tell you that France sponsors the arts and Russia sponsors the arts far more than we do, but it doesn't give you the different aspects of a country. When you say this is the greatest country in the world, in what area is it the greatest country in the world? Actually, even the word "love" is false because nobody loves another person, they love certain things about them, and in other areas they don't. Nobody loves themselves completely, all of us do stupid things and all of us remember that. And if you remember that your less apt to do it again, if you remember the negative aspects. Okay, so I think I partially understand the question but still, how can we communicate to share ideas? By teaching others the scientific method, is the best way we know of today. Thank you. I do have one question here from the audience. This person wants to know why doesn't The Venus Project grow in size and make money and start to create a bigger system with money? He knows that the overall aim is to get rid of money, but that's too far ahead, we need to make progress now, what is your response to that? My response to that is if you conscript all the money in the world, conscript it, just took it, there's not enough money to build hospitals all over the world, but there's more than enough resources, that's why we do away with money. We have the resources to make anything we want, but we don't have enough money to get what we want.

Video Details

Duration: 1 hour, 9 minutes and 10 seconds
Year: 2012
Country: United States
Language: English
Producer: The Venus Project
Director: The Venus Project
Views: 4
Posted by: ltiofficial on Feb 19, 2016

TVP Teamspeak Q&A Seminar - Mechanistic Concept (part 2) - 2012-06-10

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.