INTELLECTUAL TECHNIQUES and TOOLS that will immediately change and empower the way you interact with the world
That's a big title for me to live up to in this essay... Let's see if I can do it :) Most of these ideas come from my study of what I never learned in any school.
Executive Summary:
Give some time to improving your skills in 1) declarative knowledge, 2) leadership, 3) debate, 4) topical expertise, and 5) ability to recognize and refute fallacies and you'll be much better able to identify and resist the avalanche of fake science and abusive politics that we are exposed to on an hourly basis these days.
Our collective social survival and freedom depend on empowering ourselves as free citizens. We all have to improve our game when we are being attacked daily by corporate and globalist would-be-tyrants who have armies of psychologists, writers, and publicists on their payroll.
Orientation
A few key talents and learnable skills become essential at the higher levels of performance, regardless of the range or specificity of the topics involved…
Here, I will define common education as that which gives a person knowledge and skills to perform a prescribed and predictable set of tasks; I’ll define elite education as that which is directed to create leaders who define values, set objectives, and influence people. For example, in common education, students learn are taught receptive/passive literacy (singular) which is the ability to read; indeed, in common conversation, “literacy” simply means the ability to read. In elite education, students are taught active/expressive literacies (plural) such as debate (how to articulate, defend, and attack ideas), technical and persuasive writing, public speaking, discernment and planning (compare baseball against chess), and various types of leadership (eg, positional, agreement, autocratic, servant, etc).
Preamble
In one of his lectures, famed educator John Taylor Gatto makes the distinction between what we can call common education and what he refers to as elite education. I think we can agree that the common mode of education that most of us have received is really designed to restrain the range of thought and action to the memorization and performance of a narrow range of facts and activities. Rote memorization, standardized tests, and multiple choice examinations do not make free-thinkers and leaders regardless of the level of detail and performance that are demanded; such massive memorization (eg, medical school wherein we were on-task for 18-20 hours per day) and pressurized performance (eg, 7-8 hours of timed exams at 90 seconds per question for 280 or 318 questions1) may back-fill some intellectual resources and help create some disciplined and effective habits, but these alone do not make someone into an intellectual or leader. Intellectual discernment is a multidimensional gradated spectrum of skills and abilities that can include a wide range of talents and knowledge and which are both generalizable (ie, applicable to many topics) and specific (eg, being a brilliant astrophysicist does not make one a great politician, architect, public health advisor). However, a few key talents and learnable skills become essential at the higher levels of performance, regardless of the range or specificity of the topics involved; you’ll see that these are distinct, learnable, broadly applicable and that they eventually overlap and ultimately coalesce into these things we call “smart” and “leadership.” Here, I will define common education as that which gives a person knowledge and skills to perform a prescribed and predictable set of tasks; included within this educational process are the perspectives and attitudes that place and restrain a person within this niche. I’ll define elite education as that which is directed to create leaders who define values, set objectives, and influence people.
Essential Components… and how to acquire them
These are essential tools to survive and navigate in today’s increasingly politicized and manipulated social landscape.
Declarative knowledge: As I said in my 2013 conference presentation on nutrition and functional medicine2, declarative knowledge is that which one has memorized for use and communication, specifically without the need for prompts. This is tested academically in written-answer exams and oral/verbal examinations, not in multiple-choice exams, which assess at the level of recognition and familiarity, not mastery.
How to get more of this: Study something to a high level of detail, define and then memorize the components, then teach it to someone else to demonstrate your mastery of the topic in a sharing nondominating manner.
Leadership skills (including Confidence, Situational Awareness, Self-defense, Animal/Boat training, etc): We’ve all seen recent examples of political “leaders” who have no skill, no knowledge, no experience, and no leadership-teamwork skills who then just bluster and fumble their ways through their terms in office. My preferred style of leadership has at least three components: 1) competence, 2) collaboration, and 3) confidence. Competence comes from thinking, studying, understanding, and working/wrestling with the matter for several years. Collaboration starts with the mindset of valuing the interaction and mutual benefit of working with other people, especially including those with whom one tends to disagree; for example, when I was teaching and Directing my graduate program in the United States, I intentionally hired and co-taught with other professors who were strong in their opinions and who disagreed with me. Collaboration enhances cognition and strategy by providing external perspectives and contextualization. Confidence is the result and after-effect of combining competence with collaboration; you know where you’re going, you’ve received feedback, you have agreement and enthusiastic enrollment of the team.
How to get more of this: Competence requires years of multidisciplinary work; the only shortcut is blustering and short-term hubris. Collaborative skills can be learned in workshops, classes, and from prominent leaders such as John Maxwell (eg, Five Levels of Leadership) and Patrick Lencioni (eg, The Advantage). Confidence in leadership comes from the experience of providing quality leadership, producing happy and successful teams.
Debate, rhetoric, rebuttal: These concepts have to be learned from someone who has mastered the strategies and techniques; the source can be in-person, remote, or via book or audio/video instruction.
How to get more of this: Study, watch, and learn from persuasive speakers and teachers; try to practice the new skills in various settings, when appropriate. As popular examples: Richard Dawkins tends to be better (more civil) at this than was Christopher Hitchens (more brash), although both are famous for their debate skills.
Topical knowledge/expertise: Competence has no substitute, although partial incompetence can be off-set by recruitment of team-members who have the skills that the positional leader is lacking, at which point the leader has compensated (at least in part) for the knowledge/talent/experience that was lacking in a certain area.
How to get more of this: Try to master as many topics and abilities as possible.
Fallacies in your holster: Part of knowing how to do things right is being able to identify (in your own behavior and in other’s) when things are being done wrong. Here, I am mostly thinking of being able to recognize and refute logical fallacies that are (mis)used in politics and scientific writing, but organizational fallacies also exist. The value of being able to recognize fallacies is that you’ll be more confident and articulate when you combat the illogic because you’ll be able to specifically counterattack the falsity instead of being vague about it. I’ll discuss logical fallacies in a different essay/post (already in preparation), but for now here are some of the most important examples:
non sequitur, “it does not follow”: All fallacies/errors are non sequiturs because logical arguments are supposed to be connected, sequential, and linear; deviation from this is either a weak argument or a false argument.
FALSE EXAMPLE: “The only way to end the pandemic is via mass vaccination.”
TRUTH: We have many options in the treatment of infectious diseases; putting all our eggs in one basket is the surest way to fail when fighting against an illness that has many components and which can adapt to any singular intervention.
ad hominem: Attacking the person’s personality rather than focusing on the discussion.
FALSE EXAMPLE: People who question mandatory vaccines are anti-science.
TRUTH: Most people who question vaccines have studied the topic, have read/studied multiple points of view, have reviewed the adverse effects and therapeutic options; as such they are pro-science and actually poly-science rather than mono-science or anti-science.
origin/genetic fallacy: Asserting that something is true/valuable based on where it originated; conversely stating that something is of lesser value based on its origin.
FALSE EXAMPLE: This data was published in the New England Journal of Medicine (or JAMA) out of Oxford University so it must be true.
TRUTH: New England Journal of Medicine and Oxford University both publish and produce some of the stupidest garbage to ever pass for “medical research.” SEE MY 2 VIDEOS AND DISCUSSION.
exceptionalism, moving goal posts: Changing the rules in order to fit the goal or narrative.
FALSE EXAMPLE: Just because the vaccines don’t work doesn’t mean we should stop using them; in fact, people should get booster injections.
TRUTH: Doing more of something that does not work does not work better.
false analogy, false dilemma, false dichotomy: Limiting the scope of consideration such that whoever is speaking is going to win because they’ve preselected the options that are available.
FALSE EXAMPLE: You have to get vaccinated or you cannot have a job or buy groceries (in which case people will be forced to get vaccinated in order to survive).
TRUTH: Corralling people into “choosing” the only option being provided is generally considered manipulation, unethical behavior, institutionalized violence.
straw man, intentional misrepresentation: Misrepresenting the other side’s position in order to attack it and make it appear absurd.
FALSE EXAMPLE: Medscape publishes a nonscientific opinion piece titled “Vitamins and Supplements Are a Waste of Money” (July 09, 2019) when in fact vitamin supplementation is life-saving as proven in various clinical trials.
TRUTH: Nutritional supplementation is commonly safer and more effective than is drug treatment for pain (vitamin D), depression (vitamin D), and control of inflammatory disorders (vitamin D).
Give some time to improving your skills in 1) declarative knowledge, 2) leadership, 3) debate, 4) topical expertise, and 5) ability to recognize and refute fallacies and you'll be much better able to identify and resist the avalanche of fake science and abusive politics that we are exposed to on an hourly basis these days.
Our collective social survival and freedom depend on empowering ourselves as free citizens. We all have to improve our game when we are being attacked daily by corporate and globalist would-be-tyrants who have armies of psychologists, writers, and publicists on their payroll.
"Step 1 is a one-day examination. It is divided into seven 60-minute blocks and administered in one 8-hour testing session. The number of questions per block on a given examination form may vary, but will not exceed 40. The total number of items on the overall examination form will not exceed 280. https://www.usmle.org/step-1 Step 2 CK is a one-day examination. It is divided into eight 60-minute blocks and administered in one 9-hour testing session. The number of questions per block on a given examination will vary but will not exceed 40. The total number of items on the overall examination will not exceed 318. https://www.usmle.org/step-2-ck/
VIDEO #1: Introducing the Functional Inflammology Protocol + Detailing the Diet—Presentation from the 2013 International Conference on Human Nutrition and Functional Medicine: https://healthythinking.substack.com/p/functional-inflammology-protocol