this very same premise was dealt with in the matrix movies.
some people are so enamored and comfortable in their delusion that they will fight you tooth and nail to remain ignorant and enslaved.

About the song from Wikipedia:
The title (46 and 2) references an idea first conceived by Carl Jung and later expounded upon by Drunvalo Melchizedek concerning the possibility of reaching a state of evolution at which the body would have two more than the normal 46 total chromosomes and leave a currently disharmonious state. The premise is that humans would deviate from the current state of human DNA which contains 44 autosomes and 2 sex chromosomes. The next step of evolution would likely result in human DNA being reorganized into 46 and 2 chromosomes, according to Melchizedek.
Furthermore, the song references a wish to experience change through the "shadow"; an idea which represents the parts of one's identity that one hates, fears, and represses, this exists as a recurring theme in the work of Carl Jung.



My shadow's

Shedding skin and
I've been picking
Scabs again.
I'm down
Digging through
My old muscles
Looking for a clue.

I've been crawling on my belly
Clearing out what could've been.
I've been wallowing in my own confused
And insecure delusions
For a piece to cross me over
Or a word to guide me in.
I wanna feel the changes coming down.
I wanna know what I've been hiding in

My shadow.
Change is coming through my shadow.
My shadow's shedding skin
I've been picking
My scabs again.

I've been crawling on my belly
Clearing out what could've been.
I've been wallowing in my own chaotic
And insecure delusions.

I wanna feel the change consume me,
Feel the outside turning in.
I wanna feel the metamorphosis and
Cleansing I've endured within

My shadow
Change is coming.
Now is my time.
Listen to my muscle memory.
Contemplate what I've been clinging to.
Forty-six and two ahead of me.

I choose to live and to
Grow, take and give and to
Move, learn and love and to
Cry, kill and die and to
Be paranoid and to
Lie, hate and fear and to
Do what it takes to move through.

I choose to live and to
Lie, kill and give and to
Die, learn and love and to
Do what it takes to step through.

See my shadow changing,
Stretching up and over me.
Soften this old armor.
Hoping I can clear the way
By stepping through my shadow,
Coming out the other side.
Step into the shadow.
Forty six and two are just ahead of me.

http://videosift.com/video/TEDX-Rupert-Sheldrake-The-Science-Delusion

@Sniper007 Quite the road less-traveled pardner but worthy of the task you've set before yourself. Ruperts' a maverick, snake-oil tinctured with hard science, faith fueled by invisible cosmic forces and brass balls. He used to be a regular on the old Art Bell Flour Hour-

He apparently, has been asked by the TED talk's cabal short of a recant, to please, "never come back," which is here on the Videosift, what you are being presented with in the realms of "health"and.....ahem, "science" by the armchair enthusiasts who fancy themselves experts on all subjects above mundane. You are now in the company of the marginally successful Disrupticons of the site whose ulterior M.O. is that of "Ointment Fly."

I commend and salute you, noble sir!

Did you even watch the video?

Oh wait, nevermind. I'm sure you didn't, because if you had watched it, you would have had to question your delusions regarding the status quo.

See, what we see in this video is a woman who is abusing her power, and the man with the camera, to a ridiculous degree. She literally starts off extremely aggressive and completely unwilling to listen to what the guy is saying, and you STILL feel the need to ask for "the other side."

But it's all in the video. You just don't want to see it.

For what it's worth, the fantasy world you feminists are living in seems just awful. I can't understand why you all put so much effort into staying there.

Not only are the children of this new generation lacking in basic life skills, but they also have no respect. You are a prime example. Is your ego this large in real life, or do you have delusions of grandeur due to the anonymity that the internet provides? A well rounded individual should be able to both use their brain and perform menial tasks. It's not a choice of one or the other. So you took a break from reading and built a fence. Goody for you. A little exercise - what a chore. That's right, pay someone to work for you so you can sit around on your lazy ass all day. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Thanks for adding to the discussion and proving my point.

This was great.

Like, really fucking fantastic.

And he's right, of course. What sort of person goes into politics? And, even more importantly, what sort of person goes on to succeed in politics?

Well, in my experience, they are either psychopaths, religious or ideological zealots, or a volatile mixture of all of the above.

These people don't want others to have a choice, because in their world, you are either the the one who has all the power, or you are one of pathetic bastards who've got nothing to show but the imprint of your master's boot on your neck.

And what they've managed to do, by baiting the masses with paranoic fear, mindless hatred, and the shared delusion of their country's intrinsic greatness, is to create a sort of political cartel - a playground for the exceedingly rich, the utterly ruthless, and the ceaselessly greedy - that will insure their power and their authority and their capital even if the people they've spent the last 70 years stepping on should learn to see past their lies and finally try to pry the boots of their masters off their necks.

It's going to be interesting to see how it all pans out.

With that in mind here's a list of people that make me variously: scared, uncomfortable, upset and sometimes outright angry. I find it deeply unpleasant and sometimes disturbing to have to deal with them and I think life would be a lot better if we just locked them away.

Police
Politicians
Pro-lifers
Anyone who watches X-factor
Anyone who doesn't think the British royal family are murderous tyrants.
People who play music on their phone speakers on the bus/walking down the street.
People that use the term "free country" without irony.
The unregulated hyper rich over class.
Rugby players on a night out drinking.
People that advocate the death penalty.
Hyper nationalists.
Xenophobes, Racists and Homophobes.
The priesthood of amen/the brotherhood of shadow.
Young people in tracksuits/hoodies.
Anyone that uses the word "party" as a verb.
Practising Christians, Muslims and Jews (doubly so if they are raising their children religiously).
Hyper-Atheists.
Chimpanzees! (seriously, fuck the chimps they scare the shit out of me)
People that use the phrase "I just don't give a fuck" and actually mean it.
The Chinese scientists developing the "death robots" (you might laugh now....)

Whilst some are clearly more serious than others, all of the above represent things/traits which deeply concern me. Many of the people on that list I'd label as outright insane and/or seriously dangerous to my health and well being.

Some, were I to be confronted by them unexpectedly, would outright terrify me, much more so than that lady. There's a good chance that by simply responding with concern and a lack of antagonism she could have been talked down, but certainly pulling an incredulous expression and calling her a crazy lady is not likely to diffuse the situation one iota.

As I said before maybe she is a genuine danger to herself and others, such people do exist and there are systems in place to try and deal with it.

The issue here is that your not even remotely in a position to make that diagnosis, nor are any of us here. We don't know how serious her condition is or how likely she is to respond to various forms of treatment. Speculating based only on video's made during episodes (i.e. at her worst) with no context of her medical history just fuels the kind of knee jerk "lock them away" mindset that contributes heavily to these poor bastards getting the way they are in the 1st place.

For all you know a bit of in the community C.B.T. and mentoring might be all she needs/needed. Not everyone displaying psychotic symptoms benefits from or warrants full on institutional incarceration, it often makes things much worse.
She clearly needs/needed further investigation and perhaps having the benefit of her medical history and first hand interaction it might be reasonable to conclude that some form of isolation is needed. But I'd rather leave that down to those who are professionally qualified to make that judgement than bystanders who merely witnessed a few isolated psychotic episodes and know sweet F.A. about her as a person.

It's you that's failing to see the bigger picture here. You want to put her in a neat little box marked "crazy" so you don't have to face the implication that in some fundamental sense you are the same thing. The crazy person sits next to you on the bus and you think "I don't deserve to have to put up with this inconvenience. How dare they make me feel uncomfortable".......

....Do you have the remotest idea of the kind of deep lasting damage that does to a person when virtually everyone they ever meet thinks and behaves that way? How it feels for someone to just condemn you to be locked away without even attempting to understand what your all about?

It's only about 50 years ago that it was standard practice to basically label everything as just various forms of "madness" and lock them all away in the same building. While we've come along way there's still very much a ways to go and the public perception of acute psychotic illnesses is by far the most backwards.

If you'd said maybe she might need institutional treatment, or that you had concerns that the behaviour she displays could escalate to a violent incident (both legitimate concerns) then I wouldn't have reacted with such hostility.
But you didn't do that, you outright declared she that must be forcibly segregated and treated and moreover that she is definitely a danger to herself and others. No grey area, isolation is the only alternative!

I don't want this to descend into a personal attack, you might after all be a really nice person and this is a deeply rooted prejudice common to most people I come across. Much like many peoples homophobia isn't especially malicious it's just an unchallenged social convention (one fortunately that is changing).
But malicious or not the damage done is the same, for crazies, ethnic minorities and homosexuals alike. And I don't think its unfair to say that the "crazies" are the more vulnerable group by quite some margin.

You don't begrudge offering a little time and understanding for say a disabled person holding you up in a door way, why is taking a little step back when confronted with a "crazy" person so different? That postie clearly recognised she wasn't occupying the same reality as himself very quickly, but his response is to pull a face that says "what the fuck is your problem?" and just dismisses her as crazy. She might have calmed down and gone away peacefully in the space of a few mins if he'd tried to diffuse it, but he didn't, he escalated immediately. (because he's mentally ill too, just in a different way)
That's basically like someone getting in your way, you realizing its because they are in a wheel chair and then treating them like an arsehole because they had the indecency to be out in public and get in the way of the able bodied people! Those bloody cripples, they should be taken away for their own protection! (the fact the rest of us don't have to worry about dealing with them any more is just a bonus naturally )

Now obviously this is a somewhat flawed analogy as people with mobility impairments don't have heightened rates/likelihood of violent outbursts (though I'm sure there are plenty twats who just happen to be in wheelchairs). But the fundamental point I'm trying to make about how people treat the extravertly mentally ill stands. If your being directly threatened with no provocation is one thing, but this guy isn't he's just antagonising someone in a clear state of paranoia and delusion/misunderstanding (which he recognises within seconds). He doesn't even attempt to address that he just closes off and becomes passively hostile.
As I said before its understandable, but only in the same way as being frightened of homosexuality, alien cultures, physical disfigurement etc.. It's just cultural isolation, get to know a few people from any of those groups and it quickly starts to sublime into respect and understanding.

She didn't walk up to him screaming she walked up and firmly presented an accusation that the postman knew could not possibly have been true. She became aggressive/shouty only after he became dismissive, before that she was only restless and paranoid. And even then she didn't make any aggressive physical moves we can see. Postie doesn't look at all in fear for his safety to me, he turns his back on her several times and barely maintains eye contact, not the behaviour of someone that feels physically threatened!

How might she have reacted if postie had looked genuinely scared? Maybe she'd have backed off? Changed her attitude? And yeh maybe she'd have got even more threatening or attacked him with a stick too.

We don't know what she'd have done because we don't know her or anything about her other than a few paranoid videos on the internet. Leave the judgements to the people that have done the research, interviews etc. and know know what the fuck they are talking about with regards to this lady's condition and best treatment.

Speculation is one thing, outright declarations of fact is quite another. People are not guilty before you can prove their innocence...

There are countless people like this woman who dip in and out of psychosis but are without violent tendencies. In fact, there are very few crazies like this one out there who actually do have violent tendencies. This woman is probably going to torture herself with these delusions all her life, but it is very unlikely that she is ever going to cause another person harm as a result of them.

it's actually a common symptom of psychosis, called paranoia or a delusion of reference.

So I read a plot summary of the book its based on and it's some guy's delusions of grandeur? Besides making it cinematic, what's the point of it all?

more taxation = theft BS. By living here you are agreeing to be taxed to pay for things we all need. Like that pesky police force we all agree is necessary to a just state.

if you live here, you agree with these terms, thus no theft. If you don't like taxation, get out.

yet again we have this hypocrisy. when we agree to the terms of a contract when dealing with private business, no one complains when a business holds you to your end of the bargain. but when gov't tries to collect taxes you agree to pay and tries to hold you to your end of the bargain, suddenly it's this horrible thing.

If you want something, you have to pay for it and Libertarianism is just a way of saying "I want to get away with doing something that I know harms people" or "I want something but I don't want to have to pay for it" wrapped in delusion of freedom.

people throw around the word freedom but in reality, as @ChaosEngine pointed out. you give people freedom and they use it to fuck over other people. We haven't evolved to the point where we can realiably count on people not to fuck each other over. Someday maybe that will happen, but it certainly isn't today.

Voluntaryism is just Objectiveism and Meritocracy trying to divorce itself from the negative stigma of Ayn Rand. rebranding a failed idea to get gullible people to fall for it again. Legitimized avarice.

boy I sure didn't miss blankfist's one note charlie obsession with statism.

Did the people who come up with these ideas completely ignore the lessons they learned when they first became adults? When we're growing up, we hated our parents for imposing rules on us, when we first become adults and we have a first taste of freedom, we go nuts, we do extremely stupid things, harmful things. most adults do eventually learn that these things are harmful and *shock* learn to impose limits on themselves. Eventually they come to realize that their parents weren't jerks after all and they generally did have a good reason to impose rules on us. Sure there some shitty parents out there and the children of those shitty parents throw out the rules that didn't work when they become adults, but guess what, they don't throw out the system, they just come up with different rules. hopefully those rules are better, if not, we just try again.

There is this false notion of an adversarial relation between gov't and the people. PEOPLE CREATED GOV'T!!! gov't is just the current method by which we impose limits on ourselves. just like we do as we grow up. Sure, we don't have a perfect system. get used to it. If gov't truly wasn't necessary, we would have ditched it a long time ago. someday we will have the ability to self limit ourselves without a self-created third party, but that isn't today.

Probably isn't ever going to change until we evolve genetic memory of our parents/ancestors or we develop a way to download knowledge/experience Matrix-style so that instead of learning the hard way to not touch a stove because it's hot, we just already know it at birth or an earlier age.

yeah I'm necroposting, wanna fight about it?

It's not that they're dumb. pointing a finger at a creationist and saying they're stupid is a cop out. It's a little more complex than that.

They're evading responsibility. The god delusion is their scapegoat, whenever something bad happens, They evade and just say god did it. It's not a failure of ethics or a teachable moment, nah, god did it. Acknowledging that god doesn't exist is admitting that we're responsible for all of our past, present, and future misdeeds and failures and you can always count on us humans to avoid responsibility whenever possible.

we've already surpassed far beyond biblical morality by acknowledging that slavery is unacceptable and stoning people is unacceptable, but we still have many more moral struggles to overcome. These struggles are hard, but instead of dealing with harsh reality and answering tough questions, again, they cop out and blame it all on god instead of accepting responsibility for their own actions and failures.

Acknowledging that it's on us to create a just and ethical society that works for everyone and not just the privileged few is too much for some people...just blame it on god and go back to watching the tube. Screw this pesky critical thinking gig.

My love affair with Libertarianism was crushed by reality. I was a big Libertarian, pushing for Ron Paul up until the actual election of 2008 (I pushed Paul through the primaries). Then the company I worked for at the time sent a memo saying that if Obama won, and put his tax plans in place, they would have to fire over 300 people. Then before Obama even was in office, the company fired 350+ people, and sent a memo to the rest of us that there would be no raises (nobody at that company but the executives have had raises since) as the company couldn't afford it, and claimed that the cost of living went down anyhow. The owner then went out and purchased a private jet and another mansion in a gated community where he already had the second largest mansion in it. I called BS on that, as did a few others. I then started looking at the rich and corporations as a whole and started doing some real studies, not just Libertarian propaganda, and realized that they wouldn't operate on the rational interests of society, but would gladly screw over anyone just to advance their own short term self interests. That owner who fired over 1000 people and kept everyone else under his employ at the same pay rates over 5 years wasn't an aberration, he was the norm, a very high percentage norm. Libertarians are under a delusion that corporations and the rich will act in the rational interests of society, but they could care less about anyone but themselves, and that isn't misusing the phrase "could care less" because less than 2-3% of them care about what would be best for society as a whole, and sure I'm pulling that figure out of my ass, but I'm sure I'm being generous with that guess).

It became clear that without minimum wages, companies like McDonalds and Walmart would gladly pay their workers $1 or $2 an hour. The Libertarian response that people just wouldn't work there then, is BS, because nobody really wants to work at those places for minimum like they do now. The workers would be stuck, just like they were in the days prior to labor unions and minimum wage laws. The 40 hour work week that we have the unions to thank for, would be gone, as companies paid less, people would be forced to work more, and with the Libertarian ideal of removing overtime laws and other pay laws, people would end up working 80 to 100 hour work weeks just to make what used to be minimum. I'm sure we would see child labor return too, as families would have no choice but to put their kids to work to help make ends meet.

It became clear that without government in the way they would gladly pollute and destroy the environment if it means better short term profits and if they don't have to worry about paying clean up costs later, and in a Libertrian world, they won't have to pay for the clean up costs later as nobody would force them to.

I still believe in individual freedom. I believe drug laws are an impairment to individual freedom, the right to do with your body as you will. I don't believe that a company has unlimited freedom, corporations are not people my friend. I believe in the social contract, that we have an obligation to help lift people up, and the only way to do that is via a government that is designed to help those that need it, and that taxes must be collected to achieve that. I believe that if we teach people that greed is bad, to work in the rational interests of all, then we could eventually get rid of government, but it is needed for now to overcome those that would abuse the people. Bring government back to the people and away from the corporations and rich.

Oh and thank you very much peggedbea, for coming to my defense-Yeah NewtboyP ,i ain't one of those born-again types either, I ain't right or left of center, apolitical, pro-guns, right-to-lifer (i.e. the right to follow will), and I know the hand of who is fucking me at any given time with regard to laws and governments UNLIKE many many many people who haven't a duckling clue what they believe but simply parrot that which supports their delusions(esp. with regard to politics and religion)....Which is a category I feel you so passionately represent.

The Martin gangsta persona is bullshit, but the paranoid racist with delusions of grandeur portrayal of Zimmerman seems to be pretty accurate. Idiot should have stayed in his car, and although the asinine law may acquit the motherfucker, he killed Martin, and it was his (Zimmerman's) own damn fault.

And yes, catbutt, even the far-rightie nutters have a small delegation here at VS, replete with their own delusions, as well as the occasional drifter who succumbs, temporarily, to their representative media's onslaught of stupidity and faux rage.