Very important aspect of all this is that every step we make on the basis of understanding and need for, acquiring an understanding of what we do have a need in the next step. And so on That's how I imagine represent integration. There are two big differences in how do you do X just like that, or you're doing X as a result of understanding and need. The result will be different, the process will also be different. Unable to integrate itself due to the fact that you're doing something misunderstanding. Work at least at some point in the development in the beginning is possible to achieve a minimal and basic understanding, by trust in technology or the teacher as well as in practice Perhaps instead of understanding and the need to be a call, an intuitive desire, the feeling that this 'need', and the understanding and the need to come later But sometimes cry, and sometimes social and conditionality, it different things. Why can not the development and integration without understanding? Because if X is a result of the need for and understanding of, you know what you want and do not miss the result, as you know when you've got result and continue to do X does not make any sense to do. Of course there are exceptions, but in particular they should not count. PS: And it is on this basis, we construct the practices that I zanimayus.Umenie distinguish the call, an intuitive urge, from the work of social beliefs and blocks. Certain system of knowledge in a certain kind of transfer of the grounds not on faith but on the understanding of each step of the system of exercises and the practice of sending themselves from External actually unnecessary junk (problems, power, social , the polarization of mind and navyazanye socium behaviors and beliefs) Improving the integrity and quality of the human mechanism Finding and finding oneself, to find and build its core, its power:)
This system creates, in great contingent, the functional illiterate celebrities; this is the true politics of the bread and circus. You may find that Steve Wozniak can contribute to your knowledge. We are in a regimen if to observe the question of the practical ones of social control that has more manifestations of what only in equipment of totalitarista security, even so seems a nonsense to say this. However, as it shows Aldous Huxley our totalitarianism has peculiar characteristics that they differ very from what history tells in them. ' ' It does not have reason, without a doubt, so that the new totalitarismos if are similar to the old ones. Governments based on the club and the squad of execution by firing-squad, in the artificial misery, are not only desumanos (today nobody is worried very about this); they are inefficient for demonstration and, at a time of advanced technology, the inefficiency is sin against the Espirito Santo.
Really efficient a totalitarian state would be that one where the executive consisting Almighty of heads politicians and one I exercise of administrators, it controlled a population of slaves who did not need to be forced, because they would have love to a servido.' ' (Admirable new world, p: 18). However, what it matters to know is that it is not necessary to accept the order imposed. The knowledge? with the necessary elements of suspicion? it can propitiate the insatisfao before this, making with that let us can to cogitate true social changes. What it cannot be made is to accept. we perceive in history human being who had thinkers that they had contributed with important elements so that the man took the reins of its proper way. But still we can ask: – What it today happens so that these elements of thinking, that they reflect in acting, are so distant of the men? It seems that the capacity to convert the knowledge into perception of these problems above cited belongs to a select group of people, who are along with the society and attend everything of berth without the least to take this knowledge to the other individuals. However, this distanciamento if gave for some factors.
The thought that can improve the society, is not far how much we think. He is not something for the intellectual elites. It imports to the common citizen the inconformismo, the diffidence. However, to awake these feelings is not easy. At least we have that to leave our zone of comfort and to ask. questions denotes a difficult task: the laborious task to search answers that most of the time they are hidden behind the obscure veils of the society. Finally, we believe that the paper of any thinker in our society is the being the eyes of the too much men, ready to perceive the enemy onipresente that in the patrol and to create? after the diagnosis? attempts of transformation in the society.