William Sargent (1907 – 1988) … who was told to understand what many rescued America soldiers prisoners of war would tell the praises of communism.

He was the one to coin the word “Brainwashing” which the Chinese were good at doing (maybe explains a lot about Trumps reaction at china 😏😏😏) … which is a phenomenon that happens mostly suddenly. Most politically brainwashed victims underwent treatments resembling Therapy Patients who’s beliefs are persuaded otherwise or a religious convert in his/ her Eureka moment of enlightenment. All these cases must be rendered intelligible by the same underlying phonological and psychological processes.

So, without assuming the pop culture social colloquial use of “brainwashed” to indicate “delusional”… let’s consider it from a logical point of view… doesn’t brainwashing happen everyday?

William Sargent became very much interested in Ivan Pavlov’s experiments (1849 – 1936). Pavlov won the Nobel Prize in 1904 on his physiology of digestion but later went on perform experiments on the nervous systems. Now he trained some dog on certain characteristics and then subjected them to a lot of physical and emotional stresses which would leave the dogs collapsed on a state of hysteria and shut down its brain function. Any training given to that dog previously disappeared from that point onward and new trainings would be extremely hard to remove. Hence, the reason when you leave your stressed out dog alone in the house and come back again… the more, more and more the dog falls in love and deeply loyal to you.

Sadly, these are things that happen every single day. Stress and Strain is real on all levels no matter how much you want to deny them. They overwhelm and possess you like demons. The bullet fired at you will hit with a 95% chance of killing you – that is fact. The fact will repossess your house if you don’t pay your debt – that is real, it exists.

The question is, can you #trust objective Truth (more than brainwashing) to find you? And how can you trust a random truth? How can you trust an impersonal truth?
Only a truth that moves, lives and loves can be trusted to be objective in this dire world of brainwashing. The atheist is no different than the religious folk.

But wouldn’t a “personal” truth be more subjective than objective? I hear you say… this is almost confusing isn’t it? πŸ˜‚ … that’s why I write about weird stuff like this. I believe both are equal. The subject is the object and the object is the subject. Think of it, truth requires an object to subjectively see and validate the existence of the object and the object arises by virtue of being seen (as shown by the observer effect of quantum physics). There is a canny ability for the subjective’s qualia to demonstrate perdurantism or in other words, the ability to persist in the validation of identity. The identity is both the object and the subject. If it’s getting too much for your brain, just look at another Human being and recognise that they are both objects and subjects too. To be honest, women who want to only be treated as “subjects” and not “objectifies” should stop posting too many selfies. We also don’t want harm coming to our bodies or the bodies of our babies by physical violence – that is #objectification. The truth is in finding each person’s subjective level of objectification but it doesn’t logically negate subjectification. It just makes it socially unannounced. #Simples

Sadly, objects, as true as they are, cannot be trusted on their own without the presence of the subject giving it its persistence of identity. By this, even when the object fails, the subject itself becomes the object and the object proves to have always been the subject. Hence, the reason by the decadence of trust as object cannot be logically sound until the subject of the truth give that truth it’s objectivity.

But doesn’t this apply to everyone? Can’t everyone who is a subject just “make-up” truths and say “this is objective!”? No… objective truth must be binary and independent of the changeable whims of the subject. Objective Truth must speak “I AM Truth.” Human can say this but humans change … hence, their objectivity not matching up with their subjectivity. Perdurantism fails in humans sometimes (if not many times – e.g., have you ever forgotten your name? Or the names of your dearly heart felt beloved children? πŸ˜‚) by amnesia or dementia.

Can a subject be objectively unchanging and still remain a subject? Yes… via perdurantism.


View on Path