Ideas can only be interpreted using what we know, understand or perceive. This is because what is defined to be real and possible is sustained by beliefs and hypothesis. Our perception of our reality is only limited by what we believe about our experiences. Our ability to perceive, describe and communicate our experiences is equal to our knowledge and ability to use language. It is our knowledge of words that determines our ability to use language. Language determines both our ability to interpret an idea and our ability to effectively communicate it to others.
The limit of creative expression is constrained by the limits of our understanding. Our understanding of others is determined by word recognition. Language is limited to words. All words and language come from an externally derived ‘alien’ source. The dictionary has programmed our minds to ensure that our thoughts are incarcerated within the parameters of our language. Education is therefore installing an ‘operating system’ within our minds to control the medium of our creative expression. All ideas are filtered and translated through the medium of words.
This means that any idea that transcends language cannot be understood by a mind that is limited in its ability to understand by its vocabulary. Our minds are conditioned with language. Language constrains our creative potential so that our ability to recognise ideas is limited by our ‘vocabulary’. Language is a Trojan horse that conquers from within. Language replaces unlimited understanding with conditional understanding that cannot transcend our vocabulary. Understanding words does not always lead to ‘understanding’. Language is a mind code that limits communication and understanding within the limitations of a literal representation of reality.
The apparent effect of this code is ‘words’. To establish the individual programming used to prejudice the perception of an individual child’s mind we simply elicit their beliefs. The limitation of language is the only thing that can limit the omnipotent mind of a new born child. Computer technology provides an analogy of how language is used to condition and limit the mind of a child. There are particular ‘authorised’ beliefs that exist within the minds of children that are born into the jurisdiction of a particular language. Computer code is a language that illustrates the ‘quid pro quo’ effect upon function.
The way to control the functional expression of a computer is to assemble the computer language into a series of commands that exist as ‘software’. The creative expression of a computer is the effect of the software that is installed within it. This computer code is a language. The software ensures the computer is limited to a number of responses to predetermined commands communicated by an operator using the keys on a computer keyboard or a mouse. The computer’s programming ensures that specific commands control and limit the computer’s functional expression.
The individual programming is what determines an individual computer’s functional parameters and creative expression. If all computers are identical then the only thing that can create variances to their individual function or creative expression is the individual programming. Code is the language of computers. Words are the language of the mind. Software assembles computer code to create specific functional capability and creative expression. The language of man creates the commands in the form of beliefs which control the mind and body.
The software of the mind is the beliefs that are installed within that mind. A believer is a slave to their beliefs. Unlike a computer, that has no autonomy or freedom to choose, man can escape his spiritual slavery by removing his faith in his beliefs. The software of the mind controls the body. The software of the mind is the beliefs used to condition the minds of our children. Children that are programmed using the same language may exhibit variable exam results when their creative expression is examined, measured or compared in an educational context.
The cause of what may be perceived as poor academic results is a lack of vocabulary and the personal beliefs that are unique to the child. Language is universal but its application is not. If I want someone to understand something I will explain it. If they do not understand my explanation then I may demonstrate it. If the person to whom I attempt to explain something has a conflicting belief then their ability to understand is compromised. If a child’s knowledge of language is not sufficient to understand a teacher’s words they will be unable to correctly interpret those words.
Without understanding the transfer of knowledge is not achieved. If one child understands but another child does not then one child will have acquired what is defined as ‘knowledge’ but the other has not. An exam result cannot reveal intelligence. An exam result merely reveals a student’s comprehension and understanding of the cumulative beliefs that are promoted by the teacher. Comprehension is not possible without understanding. Understanding requires adequate knowledge of the language that is used to communicate knowledge.
There are no stupid children. What is revealed by an exam result is merely the level of the child’s understanding and what the child ‘believes’. If a child gives an incorrect answer then one or both of two things may have occurred. The first is that the child may ‘not understand’. The second is that the child may worship ‘unique beliefs’ which are in conflict with the statements and explanations used by the teacher. It doesn’t matter what we believe because all beliefs prejudice and incarcerate the perception of the mind of the believer.
If a child says that two plus two equals five they are not wrong. Whatever a person believes merely reveals their level of understanding. So what does this mean? This means that those students who do not achieve academic excellence are equally capable of achieving the same academic results as those who do. A child’s creative expression is limited only by what it believes. This means that a Muslim could become a Christian and a Democrat could become a Republican. An individual’s belief in their own identity is the belief that their identity is who and what they are.
The story of Moses shows that a child’s mind will believe it is what it believes it is. So, if a child is adopted by a mother that is not its own, it can be raised in the identity that it is told it is if it believes what it is told. When the child believes it is what it is told it is an existential operating system in the form of adopted culture’s belief system can be installed. Only a belief system can constrain a child’s mind. So, if like Moses, you take a new born Jewish orphan child from its family in Israel and raise it as an Palestinian the child will believe it is what it is told it is.
If a child believes what it is told then in terms of how that child defines itself it is what it believes it is. The truth is that we are not Christian, Jews or Muslims. We just believe we are what we are told we are. Our parents tell us who and what we are. We are not different! We are not different even when born with a disability that supresses the mind all minds are created equal. All innocent minds are equally susceptible to the influence of others. If God created Muslims, Christians, Jews, Democrats and Republicans to be different they would have manifested as different ‘species’.
Naming our children and indoctrinating them into a religion prejudices our child’s mind inhibiting the child’s ‘God given’ unique creative expression. Wearing different clothes and worshipping contrasting beliefs only makes us different within our own mind. Religion and politics implies our creator made a mistake that only religion and politics using violence, force and legislation can remedy. Knowledge is not what we know it is what we believe we know according to the testimony of others. We can only believe what we do not know!
Ideas come in response to ‘beliefs’ and thoughts such as ‘I wonder if’ or ‘how can I’. Our ‘beliefs’ are prayers that are more powerful than any ‘religious’ version of prayer and unlike religion’s prayers they are always answered. The only thing that can interfere with this ‘divine guidance’ is an inability to understand or a refusal to accept an ‘idea’ or a refusal to withdraw our faith in conflicting personal beliefs. If we worship our beliefs as our truth our mind must reject any idea that is perceived to be in conflict with those beliefs.
Other relevant articles –