Sunday, July 20, 2008

Chopsticks for Leeway: Family Decisions Off Limits to Government, Palin Update 9/08

Update to post September 1, 2008, with the belated disclosure of the pregnancy of Sarah Palin's 17 year-old daughter, a high school senior, now five months along. The campaign for her mother and the campaign of Obama apparently have agreed that family matters of candidates shall be off limits.

Fine. Then we, the voters, request - and this particular family demands - that all family matters, in any family, any make-up, any relationship not a commercial one, be off limits to government. Do you hear us? Off limits.

Sarah Palin, if you want this for you daughter and your family, give it to us as well. No government, no religious group, nobody setting legislation about personal family matters.


Here is the earlier post, far more benign, directed at the Department of Health and Human Services that, oh dear, want to protect its employees from dispensing medications they disagree with.

Life has its ups and downs, and if you cannot tolerate this, there are other jobs. If not, ask your current president why not.

Personal family decisions are not adjudicable by legislation or pharmacist; and the deity, if interested, is fully capable of acting if the issue is offensive to the deity.

And to move this along, think Chopsticks as a little motivational ditty instead of the violins and sighing sounds of the motivational speakers.

We like some life to our theme songs.

Here is a fancy version of chopsticks to get us going:

Do It Yourself. At a piano? Find middle C. Then go up to F and G above it with your two index fingers and start:

||: Dit dit dit / dit dit dit.
This space is / my space, and

Dit dit dit / dit dit dit.
That space is / your space, and

Dit dit dit / dit dit dit.
You make your choi / ces, and

I make mine.


[now go up high here, playing thirds]

||: Dit dit / dit dit / dit dit.
Go hang / your sil/ -ly heads.

Dit ditty- dit dit.
There are-things in life,

Dit ditty- dit dit.
Too complex to judge.

Dit dit / dit dit / dit dit.
Go hang / your sil/ -ly heads.

Dit ditty- dit dit.
There are-things in life,

Dit ditty- dit dit.
Too complex to judge.

Repeat :||

[cell phone ring tone]

Yes. Thank you. What's that? A letter from the Global Human-Deity Reconciliation Hymnal Society?

Asking to include this in the new revised People's Global Human-Deity Reconciliation Hymnal?

Yes! Yes! Just send the royalties to.... [support our retirement....]

FN 1 Focus points here:

a. DHH, Department of Health and Human Services,
and news of its pending proposed new Regulation to bring more government, and other people's religious beliefs, into our personal space, see also://; and

b. Lambeth. Those Anglicanswho declined to attend the Anglican Church Lambeth Conference, on grounds of disagreement on dogma, seeking to dogmatize the non-dogmatizable, - interpretations of personal lifestyles - at :// What if we just skipped dogma entirely. Suppose somebody gave a dogma party, and nobody came.

c. All extremists, impinging on others' personal responsibilities, imposing their own ideas. Latest, and most tragic update here - end of July - the news that a man who hates "liberals" and "gays" shot people in their Tennessee Unitarian church because of their support for personal lifestyle choice for all people, see ://

Sarah Palin, join the ban on intrusions into families. Your own family's privacy and your own child's teen pregnancy issue deserves it. If you want it, give it also to others.

We as humans have no unequivocal idea what any Deity originally "intended" or now "intends." Martin Luther's Stove, Translation School; and even if we did, it is the prerogative of the Deity to act or not.

And what gender, if any, is the deity and how do we know? Great question. Nobody could see the face, only the back parts; and that is gender neutral. See Exodus 33:23, Roman Catholic Douay Rheims translation.

How to identify people taking for themselves prerogatives of a Deity: here is one.

The Deciders. See Self-ordained Targeters.

Lightening up: See PoseJuxta, Corpus Meus, Law of Inviolability, where this gentle-chide ditty first appears. The chopsticks idea is offered here, with some changes, because the cadence fits so well with a quiet hike, not just a protest about unconsented invasions - into one's personal body space, prescriptions without disclosures, for example; or unsought judgments from others about choices that affect your life, not theirs.

Force is for warfare, leeway divine. See ://

Thursday, July 17, 2008

American Offshoot - Budweiser. Not An American Original. But We Remain Interested In Its Future

 Budweiser Is Not An American Original

Update 12/2008 - A European Court has agreed that American Budweiser is not entitled to use the name "Budweiser" in marketing its product in Europe. It is not original, meaning the place of origin. The Czech town of Ceske Budejovice, or Cesky Buddejovice, is the place of origin - it originally created and marketeding the beer, Budvar, or Budweis, for which its pure brew was named - Budweiser - retains its old rights of naming. The original brewery was authorized to market it back in the 1200's. See  Because of additives, American Budweiser would not even be "beer" under the purity standards of old, called Reinheitsgebot.

High time. The issue of rights to name was complicated, with competing regional patents and then Anheuser Busch being bought by European InBev. Would that purchase by Europeans bolster use of the name in Europe? But still, that is no excuse for the corporate equivocating here, ignoring the ongoing litigation and history itself, to increase sales.

MSNBC aired its advertising program entitled, "American Original - Budweiser," on the occasion of the purchase of Anheuser-Busch by Belgium's InBev. It portrayed itself as original? Who could challenge that - the great Goliath and his claim, against the little David, but David had justice on his side.

David and Goliath 1573 fresco, Regensburg, Germany (founded by Celts est. 500BC)

We, a mere gnat on the windshield of American commercial interests, earlier declined their request for us to publish their ad for the program: on grounds that the title is misleading - even false.

It leads Americans to think that Europe is buying an "American" icon. Not so. To be truthful, the title would read, 'American Offshoot: Budweiser." And we gave reasons.

We are on solid ground. We had looked into this issue of who and what is "Budweiser" earlier - and InBev's interest in buying Budweiser and its entire Anheuser-Busch umbrella. See Joy of Equivocating, Beer and the Cities, Budweis, Budweiser and InBev.

There, we found that Budweiser is European in origin, not American, and so by its purchase by InBev would really only be rejoining its original European family. Budweiser as a beer was made in Budvar (German "Budweis") in the Czech Republic from the 1200's on. It was made subsequently also in Germany, and only then brought to America mid 19th Century.

Limits even to "rejoining" the family. Budweiser US is rejoining the clan, however, but it brings baggage. On the plus side, it brings its huge marketing and manufacturing capability (very American); but it also brings its marketing-friendly but taste violative additives to the original brewing process and formula. These additives and changes may well still make it a non-beer over there. The rich relation may yet be rejected.

Ingredients are important to some countries. US Budweiser contains preservatives and rice - echhhh, says much of Europe, where many people are used to pure beers with three ingredients only - barley, hops and water. Early rules even required that "beer" be restricted to those ingredients. See the German Reinheitsgebot*.

Joy of Equivocating. Preserve Patriotism for the Patriots. We think we have a point here. We object to the manipulation of MSNBC using "patriotism" as in "American Original" to push a purely commercial enterprise, and to push a false premise along with it, that your enterprise is an American original.

It isn't. Details:

Why we declined to publish the MSNBC ad.

The topic of what happens next to Budweiser is of interest to many. There are the swillers of it, us included on occasion; and investors in it; and those employed by it. Large group. But look at it this way.

1. The Title is Propaganda. And False.

a. Budweiser is not an "American original." It is an offshoot of a European fine beer. See Czech Republic Road Ways, Hluboka nad Vlatavou, Cesky Budejovice, and Budweiser.

See the area where the beer was first brewed, and where it then branched out to Germany.

Hluboka nad Vlatavou, Czech Republic, near the original Budweis brewery

Then it was brought here, and the "Budweiser" name was even trademarked on this side of the Atlantic in early days. Even though the trademark in America was effective only over here, it had unforeseen consequences. It kept the original Budweis, the real Budweiser, from marketing here; as intended.

But it also kept our "Budweiser" out of many of the markets in Europe (because it was not made in Budweis, thus the name is deceiving).

b. Calling Budweiser an American "original" adds to our image problems. Our country is seen as overbearing and boorish enough - why add to it by claiming that makes the beer itself an American original? See Joy of Equivocating, Beer and the Cities, Budweis, Budweiser and InBev.

Ceske Budejovice - that's original.

c. The only elements of the Budweiser product that are "American originals" are these, as far as we can tell
  • superior marketing; and superior ability to manufacture a product, thanks to additives (see below) and technology that then can make megabottles; advertise and distribute;
  • additives to make the foam last a week, and add other ingredients, like preservatives unnamed, and rice instead of barley malt, so that Budweiser does not even qualify even as a beer in much of Europe*;
  • strategic trademarking here, of the name "Budweiser" so that the original Budweis could not be marketed here - and, incidentally - so that our Budweiser could not be marketed (until now, probably, with InBev probably able to legislate changes) in much of Europe.
d. America's posturing is not helpful.

Germans may well make views known, Wartburg graffiti

See the history of mooning as protest and the posture for other, more venerable reasons, at Martin Luther's Stove, Michelangelo and the Sistine at point 4, History of Mooning.

d. Fans of beer, do review the Beer and the Cities site here. See for yourself how much of Budweiser is an American "original" except for its ability to make money. Is the special being honest and truthful, or using you and your "patriotism."

2. Abuse of patriotism by misnaming the "American" original.

The MSNBC "special" is nothing but a big commercial, and it is welcome to buy that time, but not welcome to suggest that those who do not buy it after the sale are unAmerican. Now, what does tying in "American" to a commercial or political venture sound like? Administrations take many forms.

That association is unfair to those of us who love our country. Using a patriotic tie-in (lapel pun intended) is abusive. Use of associations and transfer are classic propaganda techniques. Used to persuade, not to inform. See FodderSight, Propaganda Study.

3. Do a mental adjustment. Even if you already have been subjected to the program.

Call our US Budweiser instead: "An American Offshoot - Budweiser. Rejoins the Family."

The original Budweiser Budvar, the Czech Republic

Recognize and accept our own shady history. And go ahead and drink your beer. But be honest about it.

Extreme capitalism - ok - US Budweiser's appropriation of someone else's process, its marketing and formula changes, while retaining the old name, and exploitation of trademark. is part of our country's history and economic development, even if offensive to others (see Reinheitsgebot *).

What Budweiser did as a company, so did many companies in order to get ahead. And lots of people profited. Fine. Americana. Capitalism.

We can handle honesty. Try us. We wish that MSNBC had asked whether or not Budweiser is an American original. We wish that MSNBC had taken the next adult step: even if origins are not original, does it still deserve attention because the item is part of our lives. Yes.

So, its centrality and contribution to our economy historically is what matters, not whether or not it is "original."

Hofbrau Haus, Munich (real beer)

Also tell us what happens to this issue:

Many Europeans will wonder whether our Budweiser can be marketed by that name in countries that only allow brewers from Budweis (see the Czech Republic site) to use that name.

Just like champagne can only come from the champagne regions of France.

4. The lie about originality is gratuitous anyway.

The future looks great for Budweiser so don't add the falsie about originality, to what good the real story does have, for those who like it. Many Europeans will indeed like

a) the cheap price;

b) the foam that crusts the glass by morning; and lasts on your nose until next week; and tasting the other preservatives that keep it like the pharaohs; and

Nonverbal advertising for a pub down the road, Poland

c) Europeans, some, may accept the rice malt in the Budweiser if they can't taste it. This depends: they cannot be fans of pure "beer," (the Reinheitsgebot standard that only allows hops, yeast, barley malt and water, see the Reinheitsgebot* Wars section in Joy of Equivocating, Beer and the Cities)/

Trouble is, you can taste it - the sharp bite of the preservative etc. is unmistakable in American preserved beers. Jarring. An aftertaste. Not smooth. This is not a fancy concept, like in wine with its amusing little complex nuances of floral pasta with musk. This is your very own tongue, and throat, and head while having fun.

Still, Europeans are as susceptible to advertising as we are, and they may also like the idea of drinking American, thanks to the marketing blitz to come, and already effective where it has been allowed.

5. Wish list. Any industry. Be truthful in advertising.

You may find it works. We may hop right on board. Start a new bandwagon for disclosure and see if consumers applaud - we will.

A Bandwagon. Get on board or be left behind.

Many of us are tired of nondisclosure of ingredients, testing, effects.

Our beer does not even need to disclose its ingredients - does that mean there is guano in it?

New rule. If ingredients are not listed, there is guano in it. See ://

With a new interest in Bat Man, this is a good rule. Apply it and buy accordingly. Guano. The new bull___t.

Whew. I need a Bud.
* REINHEITSGEBOT. Pure beer, and definitions and why.

If you don't like the beer, try the apple wine, here in Frankfurt, a street party.

Look up the Reinheitsgebot from 1516 in Germany, the standards for beer that had been broadly adopted in Europe, but not everywhere. The old law was extensive, see :// It brews down to ingredients: barley, not rice, or wheat (that is not even beer), hops and water. See also ://

Wednesday, July 2, 2008

The Abuse Experience and the Brain: McCain in the Cycle.

The Brain of Anyone Abused
Examine the experience of those who have experienced extended powerlessness,
pain, or even torture, in ongoing circumstances, or even a traumatic one-time

Do the abused do unto others.

Update.  John McCain was a candidate for the presidency in 2008, when this topic was first addressed.  News and other reports of his behavior under stress showed an erratic, an outburst-tendency that raised concern. If research says that the human reaction against such treatment - the drive to hit back, get out of it, do it more effectively this time --can lie dormant and be triggered later, we do not want that in a president.  Have those been affected as measured by those who have seen him lose control, sensibility in treating others. Is he a stabilizer. See  FodderSight, New Bump Key - Stabilize. The issue did not come to dealing with that in that election, and does not appear, apparently, for either presumptive major candidate in 2012.

2012.  Temperament and judgment. Effect of abuse on a person being abused was an issue before.  Today, abuse experienced by the person is not in issue, we think; but abuse that he directs at others in the sense of disregard of their interests, subsumed to others' profit, is.  How does experience of vast economic success at the expense of others, affect how a candidate may approach governing all of us.  How does past experience count. 
Explore the issue of abused and abuser, updated 2012. Employer, boss, corporate head as perceived abuser; employee, worker, fungible person as perceived abusee.  The experience of not mattering.

The projection of power.  The projector; and the projectee.  A dance.


1.  The abuser

On one level, extended experience in a particular workplace can lead to the Peter Principle:  Advancement until, finally, incompetence is reached. See :// So, an employer disregarding wellbeing of employees, if the employer is successful, may lead to advancement beyond competence, as in any other area of work.
2. The abusee.
For the employee, however, experience in being abused, disregarded, leads to different sets of being.
a) diminished neutrality in situations perceived as similar;
b) change in brain function; and
c) the likely triggering of old responses in those new situations, even unwitting, inappropriate, and uninvited.
Physical abuse, torture, gives rise to post traumatic stress disorder in some.  Employment abuse: is there a similar (but obviously different) stress effect -- its own trauma of loss of livelihood and position, PTSD and subtle variations.
If the person abused is running for high office, is there a carryover. Do we want that in high places. How to test for it.
  • 2008   Whether past abuse experiences affect functioning, conscious or unconscious, or awaiting triggering. How to measure, assess. McCain, physically abused and tortured, Obama and the losses in his life, short of physical abuse, the boss, the teen around the corner, the battered elder, the domineered or domineering spouse, the soldier as abused and abuser. Whoever. Similar human principles. These concepts are important to this election year, but not to be restricted to electioneering.
Is traumatic experience a time bomb. Experience can be a benefit, unless it is a time bomb. Sometimes experience is a benefit, if old situations recur and the old reactions, once practiced and found effective, recur. But experience may hobble someone in making new judgments in new formats.
An intense experience, as in torture, and the person's objectivity and judgment may be compromised in ways even the person does not see. If a situation that triggers old experiences, recurs, watch out. We offer here more questions than answers. For earlier discussion of torture, see Romania Road Ways, Sighet Prison, Museum of Arrested Thought.
Addressing the Abuse Experience Issue. Get the facts.
a. The experience of abuse on the table before discussing any particular case of it. Get the discussion on a factual basis. Who actually did what. For how long. We do torture now (who decides), so we can look at this. Set up a log of months, years. The captors and the captives know, and there is already much documentation out there. Test it.

  • Lay out where the person was,

  • What was happening to him at the time, by whom, what acts alleged as 'torture' or abuse

  • What witnesses,

  • What the person did or said and when, while captive, and after, about the experience

  • What factually led to better or worse treatment for that person, and how was that reported,

  • What inconsistensies are there in reports, and what variety of explanations.
b. Document the experience of abuse; and changes in the brain. Some research is already here. Do more. Then,
c. Document the experience of abuse and changes in the brain; and flawed objectivity. Some research is here. Do more. Then,
d. Document the experience of abuse and changes in the brain and flawed objectivity; and overreaction later if triggered. What evidence is there of a tendency to misread, find "it" in places where "it" it not and never was, the predisposition to spread your own fear of it to others.

Check background before snuggling.

e. Apply to the situation.
How, if at all, does a neutral analysis of the facts affect your choice, whom you want at the red button. We need info in this complex area. What perceptions are later restricted, or shaped, because of earlier abuse. Whether a girl abused, or a soldier tortured. Address it now.

If there turns out to be no effect, no change in objectivity in perception, but we checked, we still gain peace of mind.

"Whew, glad we looked at that one," and we move on accordingly.
Earlier look. These observations follow up a comparison of different kinds of experience in the everyman sense, and for candidates and others - what the people did. See Joy of Equivocating, Schmeer on Experience - What Matters. What was important to their success.

Here, Trauma Experience. This is more focused, and looks from children to adults, domestic, sexual, imprisonment abuse, how people become abusers, and ultimately the kind of extreme physical abuse claimed by Senator McCain, torture. Is torture left on the brain. Is someone tortured in a heightened sense of alert, and when does it find elements that are not there. Perception is complex. How ever to separate the need of the individual, how the individual is primed, from the perception. What did the experience of the capture do to the person.


1. Explore. The experience of the capture. The experience of abuse while captured.
1.1 Appeasement behaviors. What occurred. We are familiar with the Stockholm Syndrome: that many captives in fear, of no escape or abuse or death, will identify with the captors, try to please them, make friends. See discussion at :// Note there:

a. "people, when captured by forces that they feel helpless to resist, seek to appease those forces and work with them;" and reference to

b. "our primitive, instinctive need to cling to superior force;" and, different from a physical capture, a mind capture -

c. "slavery to implanted beliefs." Perhaps it is less inflammatory to describe it as blind (uncritical, tenets imposed, not arrived at by independent thought processes) adherence deep-rooted commitment to indoctrinated belief systems?

See also Stockholm Syndrome at :// Side comment to Guantamo - we have tried a and b but have been stymied by c? The women and children at certain polygamous ranches are not necessarily physically abused-pain, but have no escape and are confronted by superior force and c above. Is that right?

1.2 How does the captive react to knowing that he or she engaged in appeasement behaviors, it that happened, afterwards. Particularly if the larger culture idealizes the "strong" "patriots" who resist to the death, or at least until released?

  • Is there a kind of psychic dissonance between what we know we did, how we reacted, and our own self-image, our face to the world, what we know is an "ideal." What happens when the crisis is over. How do those captives, and others, react to the fact of the appeasement behavior.
  • Is there a heightened sense of denial of this very natural survival reaction, for fear of disapproval by those who have never been there, and judge.
  • How about the captive. Distortion response. Is there remaining a deep-rooted, even masked, anger, a desire to get back at the captors and those like them.
  • Do both denial and anger lead to misread signals, flawed responses. Overreactions.
  • Is there a resentment at having been put in a situation where the captive did, indeed, appease. Is that a humiliation to be denied. How better to deny than show a hard line now.
Should we define abuse experiences out of the patriotism discussion, as never chosen, no reflection of character, and acknowledge that survival reactions vary widely; prepare people for the reality of what it takes for individuals to survive, and demonstrate that one may well appease while a captive and be no less patriotic than one who does not. Does love of country, "patriotism," require that a captive extricate self from Stockholm responses? And how on earth to do that??

2. Explore. Trauma Abuse. The Overreaction Effect.
Does the experience of abuse imprint and transfer to new situations. Or is the captive or otherwise abused, taken-advantage-of person, just beaten down by it.

Is this an abused captive? Couldn't they even have left little stumps? This is sad.

We are interested in whether the abuse experience distorts how life is seen thereafter.

What is the role of pain, panic, powerlessness, the mental focus that becomes an all consuming drive to make it stop; or to compartmentalize it, mentally detach, so the self can survive.

Does the experience of abuse foster assumptions and fears that pain may or will resume in new situations, if the former captive does not take certain steps, hard, now. How does the lesson of "once burned" limit us, seem hard-wired. See overview at ://

a. Child abuse. Think of the imprinting of abuse on a child's mind. :// How about on an adult. Which is more flexible. Look at PTSD here. Abused children can show it, as well as actual brain changes.

b. Sexual abuse. The imprinting of forced sex on a girl's later ability to relate, trust. See "The Merry-go-Round of Sexual Abuse," at://' "Scarred Sexuality: The Imprint of Child Abuse Experiences on Sexual Beliefs and Behaviors," at ://

c. Adult domestic or elder abuse; Prison abuse. Prisoner abuse. See reciprocities and overview at on how behaviors evade analysis:// "Imprinting of the Psychosocial Environment on the Brain,"

Daily views of war. Bullet holes, Bojnice Castle, Slovakia

d. War, and the numbing, the "normalizing" of abuses. Living with the bullet holes on the buildings in your town. A fact of life. Memories constantly rekindled. Daily viewed by children. If war is what you have seen, and been taught as the way to deal with conflict, is war what you do. How much military do we want in decision-making positions?

e. The Big One. Torture and the Brain.

The 1961 psychological "Torture Bible" is online at ://; arguments regarding use at ://; further resource review at ://; Danish studies of tortured refugees, ://$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed. Long URL. See if you can find it.

Studies to Earth. Studies to Earth. We have a problem.

Does torture experience produce a predisposition.
Does the experience hinder the person's later ability to objectify, see or make decisions about similar events without prejudging. Does the abuse experience create a lasting anger at or loathing of self for not fighting enough, for the humiliation of appeasing, and lead the person to drive to conceal it and even deny, if that happened; or at others for the inflicting. Either way, a skewed response. When we torture, are we loosing on the world altered brains programmed against us. We asked for it.

Is that why governments prefer incarceration for life for their interrogatees, or seeking the death penalty, rather than let them go, even if the governments were wrong. Go visit the prison in Sighetu Marmeteie, Romania, the Maramures area, northwest corner. It was the "Museum of Arrested Thought" a few years ago, take a tour and want to throw up. Is it still a Museum, or is it in use again? See Romania Road Ways, Sighet Prison .

3. Explore. Does Idolizing Experience Reduce It To Another Propaganda Tool.
Is your experience inadequate? On sale now. Resume Bolsterers. CV Enhancers. Spin, propaganda, revisionist history. Available in small and large packets of puffing and selection. Already on the market. (Door slams, somebody tosses briefcase joyously on the couch where the potato waits: Honey, I added an experience gilder product to my resume, and I got the job! Potato asks: Good for you, but did anybody check it out?).

4. Explore: Do Perceptions of Experience Change Over Time: One's Own, and That Of Others. Mercurial.

Experience gets touted because we have so little else to go on. In changing times, experience, any kind, sells. The quick fix to decision-making.
Like mercury in the palm of your hand in the old days when the thermometer broke - the more you played with it, shoved it with your finger, the more it broke apart. Sniff it. Then you dumped it in a dixie cup and swirled it so it came together, then back to your hand and finally it all disappeared. And to play with it is toxic. That Absorption Effect, like propaganda, keep at it and it will take hold.
Experience and its impact on a person's future behavior defies neat cubbyholes. Be careful what you swallow. Do we see the usual burnish and bolster in the back rooms. Check out experience on your own, whether basic requirements of witnesses were there, but do not confuse love of country with where somebody happened to be when. Read all sides. Do your own search for "experience" and then type in a candidate. There you are.

5. Explore: Is Experience Illusory. Magical Thinking.

The Magic of Experience. Magical thinking that all is interconnected. See . See :// Now you see it, now you don't. Dig and ye shall find. But what? Medals here. Debunked there. See ://; :// More years somewhere get touted for predictability, stability here, so long as we have old problems and want to be better at doing old solutions; but fewer years leads to more flexibility there, with new problems. Is that so?

4. Explore. Does Experience Limit, Rather than Expand, Range of Choice.

The idea here is that neither experience nor its value are easily quantifiable; and it more often limits perception, rather than expands it, as we get lured down old pathways. Go back to Joy of Equivocating, Schmeer on Experience - What Matters. There was a view from the Hartford Courant, by means of a little test there, showing that experience blocks problem-solving. Those without "experience" with that kind of test, bloomed with it. More dogma downed. Experience didn't help.

5. Explore. Is Experience Misleading, Leading to Old Traveled Roads. And there might be an alternative, better paved.

Roma (Gypsy) wagon, Zakopane, Poland - a population, globally Stockholmed?

So, apply a healthy skepticism to "experience" when there are new challenges; or the old patterns lead down now-eroded paths. Some challenges require the ability to think outside boxes. You don't want the old elephant leading the herd necessarily. The old watering holes have become tar pits. Traps.

Remember that fabulous mural, two stories high, at the Carnegie Museum in Pittsburgh years ago - the artist lived down the street from us, the chief staff artist, Ottmar F. Von Fuehrer. See :// Big mammoth, stuck, sinking, tusks up, panicking, in tar pit, can't get out. Kids agape, went back year after year. Understand it was destroyed 1998. Bad choice. Whose "experience" led to that decision?

Lesson in the brain still: a little misstep, a mistaken belief that the old pathway was still safe, and that mammoth, trumpeting in my brain, was done for. All his experience couldn't help him there.

6. Explore: What Kinds of Experience Lead to Greater and Greater Things.

Exploring works. Variation, testing self works. Repetition, in the same limited environment of usual suspects, doesn't. If we value it so much, give it to each other and the kids, adults having recreation time, learning from what is enjoyable.

Why not go back to geniuses of past centuries. Use positive, direct learnings, as important (more than) rote from textbooks. Hands on, all the senses. Look at people like Jan Amos Komensky, 18th Century, who knew that. He fostered the idea of school through play. See Bogomilia, Jan Amos Komensky, Teacher of Nations. Why must our system be so texty, judgmental and punitive. And our system does not work. Measure it by literacy and inventiveness in 17 year olds, 30 year olds, 40 year olds. On up. For learning, see Europe Road Ways, How We Do It.

Experience rewarded. This leads to laziness; just stay with the tried and true, and await more rewards, like Pavlov's dog. Rest on laurels. Or, experience makes no difference, falls on deaf feet. Fool me once, as the uselessness of experience, see :// Some are unlearnable.