Reminder of your goal/why you are doing this. Keep a written statement of your goals with you, always. There is great power in writing down your goals, there is great power in repeatedly feeding yourself the same statements.
When ever your legs start shaking, whenever your will starts doubting you, have a look at your goals. Remind yourself why you are doing this and why this is important to you. There were some very good reasons that made you tread on this difficult journey alone, that made you dare out into the unknown like this. Bring your focus back to those reasons. When doubts arise, counter them with thoughts and visions of achieving your goal, living your goal.
Self suggestion and visualization. A person creating his/her own life, has to be good at imagination. If you can imagine having it, you will have it. Imagine relentlessly about living your goal. When you do this, think as if you have achieved your goal. Think of how you are enjoying it. Stick around images and quotes in your workplace that help you with your imagination. Use a vision board.
In fact, it’s best to go over your goals daily. Read them, feel them. Imagine and feel the same way you would feel when the goal is achieved. Bring this practice into daily routine. This is a powerful technique called self-suggestion.
Cultivating discipline and inner strength. Discipline is the hand that pulls you out when you are drowning. Cultivate it. Decide and maintain a schedule you work on. Set short term, mini-goals(around 90 days) and promise yourself to work on them without fail. If this seems too long, take a shorter period. Then, when you become comfortable with that, increase the time. Discipline and inner strength can be built just like muscles. You use progressive training – you start with what feels comfortable and then keep adding on to it as you see progress.
Understand that, in essence, your doubts are just tricks that your mind plays on you. When you make continuous and relentless effort towards your goal, you are bound to achieve it. There can be no other way things can go, there can be no other results. Get over these doubts with discipline.
When you cultivate the habit of working at a fixed schedule everyday, day in and day out, your mind understands that it’s tantrums are no longer rewarded. It might sulk a bit in the beginning, it might try to cause some trouble but, with an iron hand, it gets tamed quickly and gets used to the routine. In time, it will get very comfortable with it. So much so that it will feel uneasy without the schedule. It is all about forming the habit. Once this habit is formed, you can’t stop continuing on your work, even if you are not in the mood. It has become your natural instinct, a way of life.
Showing up, everyday. Since leaving the corporate life last year and starting this website, I have been writing for at least 6 Pomodoro’s(25 minute work blocks) each day(excluding weekends). Doing it repeatedly over a few months has made it a habit for me. When I get up on any given day, I don’t have to think whether I am going to work or not. That I will work is a given, whether I am in the mood or not. Even on bad days, when I don’t feel like writing, I go ahead and sit on the chair anyway. I ‘show up’. I feel my feelings, I don’t fight the low mood, I experience it fully. Sometimes, in a few minutes, I start getting ideas to write about. I start writing and soon am totally engulfed in it. Some of my very good articles have come this way. Other times, I get a feeling I would be better off doing something else. I don’t fight it, I flow with it and get on to other things I have to do. This way, I am not burdened with being productive with my writing everyday. I just show up with sincerity every time. The rest takes care of itself. No matter what, I never miss showing up.
It’s OK to not do your best every time. Don’t try to make yourself give the same high output every day. While having high expectations of yourself is good, too much of it can bring down your motivation. Find the right balance through trial and error. If you can’t do your best someday, don’t despair. Do whatever you can and let it go. As long as you keep showing up, you will find the answers.
Take a break. A lot of times, a dip in motivation is caused just by overwork. Have you been thinking continuously about your life, your project? Our mind needs rest and change to function well. If you over burden it, you will neither perform well, nor feel very motivated. Create schedules that allow for proper rest and recreation too. Thinking and deciding about your life and work can be kept for fixed periods(readjournal writing), for the rest of the time, keep it out of your mind for your own good.
Deal only with the best. Expect the best, from yourself and from others. Deal with only the best. Meet with the best people for your work, read the best literature to motivate yourself, watch the most motivating movies, eat the most healthy food, keep the best health habits…
Attitudes are generally similar in different areas of our lives. If we allow ourselves to eat shoddy food, it’s unlikely we will have the best exercise routine or the best aims, efforts and motivation in life. When you have decided to go out for the best aims in life, start making that change in other areas of your life too.
Cultivate Self reliance. Do you feel bad when others don’t support you? Is your success dependent upon others helping you?
Make yourself a resolve to be completely self dependent. This includes your needs for finances, emotional support and motivation. You need no body’s support, you are complete in yourself, you have the sole power. Expecting the support of others equals demeaning your own power. If your loved ones support you, it’s good. But if they don’t, go ahead alone. You are capable and strong, stronger than you believe you are. As you trudge along, more and more strength will find it’s way to you. Keeping expectations only from yourself ensures you are in total control. Become an island in this regard, a beacon of hope. A self sustaining phenomenon. A light house that other’s get their sense of direction from…
Become the light at the end of the tunnel. Set an example hard to deny. When you just focus on you goal, even against the advice and support of everyone else, you do more good than just to yourself. You wake others out of their stupor. You give them a very positive, very motivating example that’s hard to ignore. You not only change your life, you motivate others to do it too!
*****
All of this may seem hard but what fun is their in getting what’s easy? This will make you stronger. More than getting the goal you desire, this quest will expand you as a person. The growth, confidence and sense of mastery over life you will get out of this will far outweigh the smaller benefits.
An adventure is supposed to be challenging and uncertain. Let it be that way. Embrace the uncertainty. Let self doubt be there. Observe it like an outside entity. It arises in your mind but you have the free will to choose whether you will let it control you. Let it arise and leave. Never stop moving, never stop showing up!
Master List of Logical Fallacies
Fallacies are fake or deceptive arguments, arguments that prove nothing. Fallacies often seem superficially sound, and they far too often retain immense persuasive power even after being clearly exposed as false. Fallacies are not always deliberate, but a good scholar’s purpose is always to identify and unmask fallacies in arguments.
Ad Hominem Argument: Also, "personal attack," "poisoning the well." The fallacy of attempting to refute an argument by attacking the opposition’s personal character or reputation, using a corrupted negative argument from ethos. E.g., "He's so evil that you can't believe anything he says." See also Guilt by Association. Also applies to cases where valid opposing evidence and arguments are brushed aside without comment or consideration, as simply not worth arguing about.
Appeal to Closure. The contemporary fallacy that an argument, standpoint, action or conclusion must be accepted, no matter how questionable, or else the point will remain unsettled and those affected will be denied "closure." This refuses to recognize the truth that some points will indeed remain unsettled, perhaps forever. (E.g., "Society would be protected, crime would be deterred and justice served if we sentence you to life without parole, but we need to execute you in order to provide some sense of closure.") (See also "Argument from Ignorance," "Argument from Consequences.")
Appeal to Heaven: (also Deus Vult, Gott mit Uns, Manifest Destiny, the Special Covenant). An extremely dangerous fallacy (a deluded argument from ethos) of asserting that God (or a higher power) has ordered, supports or approves one's own standpoint or actions so no further justification is required and no serious challenge is possible. (E.g., "God ordered me to kill my children," or "We need to take away your land, since God [or Destiny, or Fate, or Heaven] has given it to us.") A private individual who seriously asserts this fallacy risks ending up in a psychiatric ward, but groups or nations who do it are far too often taken seriously. This vicious fallacy has been the cause of endless bloodshed over history.
Appeal to Pity: (also "Argumentum ad Miserecordiam"). The fallacy of urging an audience to “root for the underdog” regardless of the issues at hand (e.g., “Those poor, cute little squeaky mice are being gobbled up by mean, nasty cats that are ten times their size!”) A corrupt argument from pathos. See also Playing to Emotions.
Appeal to Tradition: (also "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"). The fallacy that a standpoint, situation or action is right, proper and correct simply because it has "always" been that way, because people have "always" thought that way, or because it continues to serve one particular group very well. A corrupted argument from ethos (that of past generations). (E.g., "In America, women have always been paid less, so let's not mess with long-standing tradition."). The reverse of this is yet another fallacy, the "Appeal to Novelty," e.g., "It's NEW, and [therefore it must be] good, or improved!"
Argument from Consequences: The major fallacy of arguing that something cannot be true because if it were the consequences would be unacceptable. (E.g., "Global climate change cannot be caused by human burning of fossil fuels, because if it were, switching to non-polluting energy sources would bankrupt American industry," or "Doctor, that's wrong! I can't have cancer, because if I did that'd mean that I won't live to see my kids get married!")
Argument from Ignorance: The fallacy that since we don’t know (or can never know, or cannot prove) whether a claim is true or false, it must be false (or that it must be true). E.g., “Scientists are never going to be able to positively prove their theory that humans evolved from other creatures, because we weren't there to see it! So, that proves the Genesis six-day creation account is literally true as written!” This fallacy includes Attacking the Evidence, e.g. "Your arguments are false! That proves I'm right!" This usually includes “Either-Or Reasoning:” E.g., “The vet can't find any reasonable explanation for why my dog died. See! See! That proves that you poisoned him! There’s no other logical explanation!” A corrupted argument from logos. A fallacy commonly found in American political, judicial and forensic reasoning.
Argument from Inertia (also “Stay the Course”). The fallacy that it is necessary to continue on a mistaken course of action even after discovering it is mistaken, because changing course would mean admitting one's decision (or one's leader, or one's faith) was wrong, and all one's effort, expense and sacrifice was for nothing, and that's unthinkable. A variety of the Argument from Consequences or the Appeal to Tradition.
Argument from Motives (also Questioning Motives). The fallacy of declaring a standpoint or argument invalid solely because of the evil, corrupt or questionable motives of the one making the claim. E.g., "Bin Laden wanted us out of Afghanistan, so we have to keep up the fight!" Even evil people with corrupt motives sometimes say the truth (and even those who have the highest motives are often wrong or mistaken). A variety of the Ad Hominem argument.
Argumentum ad Baculam (also "Argument from the Club"). The fallacy of "persuasion" by force, violence, or threats. E.g., "Gimmee your money, or I'll knock your head off!" or "We have the perfect right to take your land, since we have the guns and you don't." Also applies to indirect forms of threat. E.g., "Believe in our religion if you don't want to burn in hell forever and ever!"
Argumentum ex Silentio (Argument from Silence. See also, Argument from Ignorance). The fallacy that if sources remain silent or say nothing about a given subject or question this in itself proves something about the truth of the matter. E.g., "Science can tell us nothing about God. That proves God doesn't exist." Or "Science admits it can tell us nothing about God, so you can't deny that God exists!" Often misused in the American justice system, where, contrary to the 5th Amendment, remaining silent or "taking the Fifth" is often falsely portrayed as proof of guilt. E.g., "Mr. Hixel has no alibi for the evening of January 15th. This proves that he was in fact in room 331 at the Smuggler's Inn, murdering his wife with a hatchet!" In today's America, choosing to remain silent in the face of police officer's questions makes one guilty enough to be arrested or even shot.
Bandwagon (also, Argument from Common Sense, Argumentum ad Populum): The fallacy of arguing that because "everyone" supposedly thinks or does something, it must be right. E.g., "Everyone knows that undocumented aliens ought to be kicked out!" Sometimes also includes Lying with Statistics, e.g. “Surveys show that over 75% of Americans believe Senator Snith is not telling the truth. For anyone with half a brain, that conclusively proves he’s a dirty liar!”
Begging the Question (also Circular Reasoning): Falsely arguing that something is true by repeating the same statement in different words. E.g., “The witchcraft problem is the most urgent spiritual crisis in the world today. Why? Because witches threaten our very souls.” A corrupt argument from logos. See also "Big Lie technique."
Big Lie Technique (also "Staying on Message"): The contemporary fallacy of repeating a lie, slogan or deceptive half-truth over and over (particularly in the media) until people believe it without further proof or evidence.. E.g., "What about the Jewish Question?" Note that when this particular phony debate was going on there was no "Jewish Question," only a "Nazi Question," but hardly anybody in power recognized or wanted to talk about that.
Blind Loyalty (also Blind Obedience, the "Team Player" appeal, or the Nuremberg Defense). The dangerous fallacy that an argument or action is right simply and solely because a respected leader or source (a President, expert, one’s parents, one's own "side," team or country, one’s boss or commanding officers) say it is right. This is over-reliance on authority, a corrupted argument from ethos that puts loyalty above truth, above one's own reason and above conscience. In this case a person attempts to justify incorrect, stupid or criminal behavior by whining "That's what I was told to do," or “I was just following orders."
Blood is Thicker than Water (also Favoritism, Compadrismo, "For my friends, anything."). The reverse of the "Ad Hominem" fallacy, a corrupt argument from ethos where a statement, argument or action is automatically regarded as true, correct and above challenge because one is related to, or knows and likes, or is on the same team as the individual involved. (E.g., "My brother-in-law says he saw you goofing off on the job. You're a hard worker, but who am I going to believe, you or him? You're fired!")
Bribery (also Material Persuasion, Material Incentive, Financial Incentive). The fallacy of "persuasion" by bribery, gifts or favors, the reverse of the Argumentum ad Baculam. As is well known, someone who is persuaded by bribery rarely "stays persuaded" unless the bribes keep on coming in and increasing with time.
The Complex Question: The fallacy of demanding a direct answer to a question that cannot be answered without first analyzing or challenging the basis of the question itself. E.g., "Just answer me "yes" or "no": Did you think you could get away with plagiarism and not suffer the consequences?" Or, "Why did you rob that bank?" Also applies to situations where one is forced to either accept or reject complex standpoints or propositions containing both acceptable and unacceptable parts. A corruption of the argument from logos.
Diminished Responsibility: The common contemporary fallacy of applying a specialized judicial concept (that criminal punishment should be less if one's judgment was impaired) to reality in general. E.g., "You can't count me absent on Monday--I was hung over and couldn't come to class, so it's not my fault." Or, "Yeah, I was speeding on the freeway and killed a guy, but I was buzzed out of my mind and didn't know what I was doing, so it didn't matter that much." In reality the death does matter very much to the victim, to his family and friends and to society in general. Whether the perpetrator was high or not does not matter at all since the material results are the same.
Either-Or Reasoning: (also False Dilemma, Black / White Fallacy). A fallacy that falsely offers only two possible alternatives even though a broad range of possible alternatives are always really available. E.g., "Either you are 100% straight or you are queer as a $3 bill--it's as simple as that, and there's no middle ground!" Or, “Either you’re in with us all the way or you’re a hostile and must be destroyed! What's it gonna be?"
”E" for Effort. (Also Noble Effort) The contemporary fallacy that something must be right, true, valuable, or worthy of credit simply because someone has put so much sincere good-faith effort or even sacrifice and bloodshed into it. (See also Appeal to Pity, Argument from Inertia, or Sob Story.).
Equivocation: The fallacy of deliberately failing to define one's terms, or deliberately using words in a different sense than the one the audience will understand. (E.g., Bill Clinton stating that he did not have sexual relations with "that woman," meaning no sexual penetration, knowing full well that the audience will understand his statement as "I had no sexual contact of any sort with that woman.") This is a corruption of the argument from logos, and a tactic often used in American jurisprudence.
Essentializing: A fallacy that proposes a person or thing “is what it is and that’s all that it is,” and at its core will always be the way it is right now (E.g., "All terrorists are monsters, and will still be terrorist monsters even if they live to be 100."). Also refers to the fallacy of arguing that something is a certain way "by nature," an empty claim that no amount of proof can refute. (E.g., "Americans are cold and greedy by nature," or "Women are better cooks than men.")
Excluded Middle: A corrupted argument from logos that proposes that since a little of something is good, more must be better (or that if cutting down on something is good, none at all is even better). E.g., "If eating an apple a day is good for you, eating an all-apple diet is even better!" or "If a low salt diet prolongs your life, a zero-salt diet should make you live forever!"
False Analogy: The fallacy of incorrectly comparing one thing to another in order to draw a false conclusion. E.g., "Just like an alley cat needs to prowl, a normal person can’t be tied down to one single lover."
Finish the Job: The dangerous contemporary fallacy that an action or standpoint (or the continuation of the action or standpoint) may not be questioned or discussed because there is "a job to be done," falsely assuming all "jobs" are meaningless but never to be questioned. Sometimes those involved internalize ("buy into") the "job" and make the task a part of their own ethos. (E.g., "Ours is not to reason why / Ours is but to do or die.") Related to this is the "Just a Job" fallacy. (E.g., "How can torturers stand to look at themselves in the mirror? But, I guess it's OK because for them it's just a job.") (See also "Blind Loyalty," "Argument from Inertia.")
Guilt by Association: The fallacy of trying to refute or condemn someone's standpoint, arguments or actions by evoking the negative ethos of those with whom one associates or of a group, religion or race to which he or she belongs. A form of Ad Hominem Argument. (E.g., "Don't listen to her. She's a Republican so you can't trust anything she says.")
The Half Truth (also Card Stacking, Incomplete Information). A corrupt argument from logos, the fallacy of telling the truth but deliberately omitting important key details in order to falsify the larger picture and support a false conclusion (e.g. “The truth is that Ciudad Juárez, Mexico is one of the world's fastest growing cities and can boast of a young, ambitious and hard-working population, mild winters, a dry and sunny climate, low cost medical and dental care, a multitude of churches and places of worship, delicious local cuisine and a swinging nightclub scene. Taken together, all these facts clearly prove that Juarez is one of the world’s most desirable places for young families to live, work and raise a family.”)
I Wish I Had a Magic Wand: The fallacy of regretfully (and falsely) proclaiming oneself powerless to change a bad or objectionable situation.. E.g., "What can we do about high gas prices? As Secretary of Energy I wish I had a magic wand, but I don't." [shrug]
Just in Case: A fallacy by which one’s argument is based on a far-fetched or completely imaginary worst-case scenario rather than on reality. This plays on pathos (fear) rather than reason. E.g., "What if armed terrorists were to attack your county grain elevator tomorrow morning? Are you ready to fight back? Better stock up on assault rifles just in case!"
Lying with Statistics: Using true figures and numbers to “prove” unrelated claims. (e.g. "College tuition costs have never been lower. When taken as a percentage of the national debt, getting a college education is actually far cheaper today than it was in 1965!"). A corrupted argument from logos. (See also Half-truth, Snow Job, and Red Herring.)
MYOB (Mind Your Own Business; You're Not the Boss of Me; The Appeal to Privacy), The contemporary fallacy of arbitrarily terminating any discussion of one's own standpoints or behavior, no matter how absurd, dangerous, evil or offensive, by drawing a phony curtain of privacy around oneself and one's actions. A corrupted argument from ethos (your own). (E.g., "Sure, I was doing eighty and weaving between lanes on Mesa Street--what's it to you? You're not a cop, you're not my nanny It's my business to speed, and your business to get the hell out of the way. Mind your own business!" Or, "Yeah, I killed my kid. So butt out! It's none of your business!") (See also, "Taboo.") Rational discussion is cut off because "it is none of your business!"
Name-Calling: A variety of the "Ad Hominem" argument. The dangerous fallacy that, simply because of who you are, any and all arguments, disagreements or objections against your standpoint or actions are automatically racist, sexist, anti-Semitic, bigoted, discriminatory or hateful. E.g., "My stand on abortion is the only correct one. To disagree with me, argue with me or question my judgment in any way would only show what a pig you really are." Also applies to refuting an argument by simply calling it a fallacy or declaring it invalid, without proving why it is invalid. See also, "Reductionism."
Non Sequitur: The fallacy of offering reasons or conclusions that have no logical connection to the argument at hand (e.g. “The reason I flunked your course is because the government is now putting out purple five-dollar bills! Purple!”). (See also Red Herring.)
Overgeneralization (also Hasty Generalization). The stupid but common fallacy of incorrectly applying one or two examples to all cases (e.g. “Some college student was tailgating me all the way up North Main Street last night. This proves that all college students are lousy drivers and that we should pull their driver’s licenses until they either grow up, learn to drive or graduate!”).
The Paralysis of Analysis (also, Procrastination): A postmodern fallacy that since all data is never in any conclusion is always provisional, no legitimate decision can ever be made, and any action should always be delayed until forced by circumstances. A corruption of the argument from logos.
Playing on Emotion (also, the Sob Story): The classic fallacy of pure argument from pathos, ignoring facts and calling on emotion alone. E.g., “If you don’t agree that witchcraft is a major problem just shut up for a moment and picture in your mind all those poor moms crying bitter tears for their innocent tiny little children whose little beds and tricycles lie cold and abandoned, all because of those wicked old witches! Let’s string’em up!”
Political Correctness ("PC"): A postmodern fallacy that the nature of a thing or situation can be changed simply by changing its name. E.g., "Today we strike a blow against cruelty to animals by changing the name of ‘pets’ to ‘animal companions.’" or "Never, ever use the word 'victim' because it sounds so negative, helpless and despairing. Instead, call them 'survivors.'" (Of course, when "victims" disappear then the perpetrators conveniently vanish as well!)
Post Hoc Argument: (also, "post hoc propter hoc" argument, or the "too much of a coincidence" argument): The classic fallacy that because something comes at the same time or just after something else, the first thing is caused by the second. E.g., "AIDS first emerged as a problem during the exact same time that Disco music was becoming popular--that's too much of a coincidence: It proves that Disco caused AIDS!"
Red Herring: An irrelevant distraction, attempting to mislead an audience by bringing up an unrelated, but usually emotionally loaded issue. E.g., "In regard to my recent indictment for corruption, let’s talk about what’s really important instead: Sky-high taxes! Vote for me! I'll cut your taxes!"
Reductionism: (also, Oversimplifying, Sloganeering): The fallacy of deceiving an audience by giving simple answers or slogans in response to complex questions, especially when appealing to less educated or unsophisticated audiences. E.g., "If the glove doesn’t fit, you must vote to acquit." Or, "Vote for Snith. He's tough on crime!"
Reifying: The fallacy of treating imaginary categories as actual, material "things." (E.g., "Back in the day, the biggest struggle in youth culture was between Goths and Emos.") Sometimes also referred to as "Essentializing" or “Hypostatization.”
Scare Tactic (Also Paranoia): A variety of Playing on Emotions, a raw appeal to fear. A corrupted argument from Pathos.(E.g., "If you don't do what I say we're all gonna die! In this moment of great crisis we can't afford the luxury of criticizing or trying to second-guess my decisions. Our very lives are in peril! We need to be united as one!")
Sending the Wrong Message: A dangerous fallacy that attacks a given statement or action, no matter how true, correct or necessary, because it will "send the wrong message." In effect, those who use this fallacy are publicly confessing to fraud and admitting that the truth will destroy the fragile web of illusion that has been created by their lies. E.g., "Actually, we're losing the war against drugs hands down, but if we publicly admit it we'll be sending the wrong message."
Shifting the Burden of Proof. (see also Argument from Ignorance) A fallacy that challenges opponents to disprove a claim, rather than asking the person making the claim to defend his/her own argument. E.g., "Space-aliens are everywhere among us masquerading as true humans, even right here on campus! I dare you prove it isn't so! See? You can't! That means what I say is true."
Slippery Slope (also, the Domino Theory): The common fallacy that "one thing inevitably leads to another." E.g., "If you two go and drink coffee together one thing will lead to another and soon enough you'll be pregnant and end up spending your life on welfare living in the projects," or "If we close Gitmo, pretty soon armed terrorists will be on our doorstep!"
Snow Job: The fallacy of “proving” a claim by overwhelming an audience with mountains of irrelevant facts, numbers, documents, graphs and statistics that they cannot be expected to understand. This is a corrupted argument from logos. See also, "Lying with Statistics."
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, ridiculous version of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!"
Taboo: The fallacy of unilaterally declaring certain arguments, standpoints or actions to be "sacrosanct" or not open to discussion, or arbitrarily taking some standpoints or options "off the table" beforehand. (E.g., "Don't bring my drinking into this," or "Before we start, I won't allow you to attack my arguments by claiming 'That's just what Hitler would say!'")
Testimonial (also Questionable Authority, Faulty Use of Authority): A fallacy in which support for a standpoint or product is provided by a well-known or respected figure (e.g. a star athlete or entertainer) who is not an expert and who was probably well paid to make the endorsement (e.g., “Olympic gold-medal pole-vaulter Fulano de Tal uses Quick Flush Internet-shouldn’t you?"). Also includes other false, meaningless or paid means of associating oneself or one’s product with the ethos of a famous person or event (e.g. “Try Salsa Cabria, the official taco sauce of the Winter Olympics!”) This is a corrupted argument from ethos.
They're Not Like Us: A badly corrupted, racist argument from ethos where facts, arguments, experiences or objections are arbitrarily disregarded, ignored or put down without consideration because those involved "are not like us," or "don't think like us." E.g., "It's OK for Mexicans to earn half a buck an hour in the maquiladoras. If it happened here I'd call it brutal exploitation and daylight robbery, but way down south of the border they're not like us." Or, "Sure, the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people, but in Asia they're not like us and they don't think about life and death the same way we do ." A variety of the Ad Hominem Argument, most often applied to non-white populations.
TINA (There Is No Alternative. Also "That's an order," "Get Over It," or the "fait accompli"). A very common contemporary extension of the either/or fallacy, quashing critical thought by announcing that there is no realistic alternative to a given standpoint, status or action, ruling any and all other options irrelevant, or announcing that a decision has been made and any further discussion is insubordination, disloyalty, or simply a waste of valuable time when there's a job to be done. (See also, "Taboo;" "Finish the Job.")
Transfer: A corrupt argument from ethos, falsely associating a famous person or thing with an unrelated standpoint (e.g. putting a picture of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on an advertisement for mattresses, using Genghis Khan, a Mongol who hated Chinese, as the name of a Chinese restaurant, or using the Texas flag to sell cars or pickups that were made in Detroit, Kansas City or Kyoto)..
Tu Quoque ("You Do it Too!"; also Two Wrongs Make a Right): A corrupt argument from ethos. The fallacy of defending a shaky or false standpoint or excusing one's own bad action by pointing out that one's opponent's acts or personal character are also open to question, or are perhaps even worse than one's own. E.g., "Sure, we torture and kill but we don't cut off heads off like they do!" Or, "You can't stand there and accuse me of corruption! You guys are all in politics and you know what you have to do to get reelected!" . Related to the Red Herring and to the Ad Hominem Argument.
We Have to Do Something: The dangerous contemporary fallacy that in moments of crisis one must do something,anything, at once, even if it is an overreaction, is totally ineffective or makes the situation even worse, rather than "just sit there doing nothing." (E.g., "Banning air passengers from carrying ham sandwiches onto the plane and making babies take off their little pink baby-shoes probably does nothing to deter potential hijackers, but we have to do something to respond to this crisis!") This is a corrupted argument from pathos. (See also "Scare Tactic.")
Where there’s smoke, there’s fire (also Hasty Conclusion, Jumping to a Conclusion). The dangerous fallacy of drawing a snap conclusion and/or taking action without sufficient evidence. E.g., “My neighbor Jaminder Singh wears a long beard and a turban and speaks a funny language. Where there's smoke there's fire. That’s all the evidence we need that he's a terrorist! Let's burn his store down!” A variety of the “Just in Case” fallacy.
synonyms: | pen name, nom de plume, assumed name, false name, alias,professional name, sobriquet, stage name, nom de guerre "Geisel was best known by the pseudonym 'Dr. Seuss'" |
With a quick glance over peacepink members page, I can see that many are using pseudonyms. I myself use one, that being David ofTomorrw. I once used my real name, but I started to look for work, and I did not want any prospective employer to find my comments, and realities by finding my peacepink membership by googleing my name. So, I changed it. For a while, I continued to post my real face with a new moniker, Big Al.
Many might have different reasons for keeping their actual identity private. It really is a matter of personal choice. Some feel that they must put their personal information out there for all to see is more genuine. For them, it may be so.
On the other hand, some have families and jobs that they need to think of. Some just dont know who to trust, so they use a pseudonym.
What do you think, Is it advantageous to use a pseudonym?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMtsouaMB8Q
This is a grest Interview with CIA Whistlblower, Dr. Robert Duncan
It has often been said that adversity builds character. How does this work?Research on resilience suggests a metaphor: Comparing the building of resilience with the building of strength through physical exercise.
Two quotes from Eleanor Roosevelt capture this:
Do one thing everyday that scares you.
and
I believe that anyone can conquer fear by doing the things he fears to do, provided he keeps doing them until he gets a record of successful experiences behind him.
You cannot get stronger without exercising (say, for instance, lifting weights). For the training to be significant, you have to go beyond your comfort zone.
However, there is an important note of caution: If you lift weights that are way too heavy for you, you get injured. Then, not only do you not get stronger, you’re not even able to exercise any more, until the injury is healed.
The practical implications are very clear:
- You need to be challenged in order to grow. As you successfully overcome challenges, you build resilience, i.e. the ability to successfully face other challenges.
- But, if the challenges are overwhelming, i.e. too far beyond your capacity to handle adversity, you get traumatized. I use the word “traumatized” to describe a situation that is similar to the physical injury that comes from exercising way beyond your abilities: This reduces your capacity to function effectively, let alone face adversity. You can’t make significant progress until this is healed.
The following is excerpted from an article in The New York Times' Science section, January 5, 2011: On Road to Recovery, Past Adversity Provides a Map, by Benedict Carey
Research suggests that resilience may have at least as much to do with how often people have faced adversity in past as it does with who they are — their personality, their genes, for example — or what they’re facing now. That is, the number of life blows a person has taken may affect his or her mental toughness more than any other factor.
“Frequency makes a difference: that is the message,” said Roxane Cohen Silver, a psychologist at the University of California, Irvine. “Each negative event a person faces leads to an attempt to cope, which forces people to learn about their own capabilities, about their support networks — to learn who their real friends are. That kind of learning, we think, is extremely valuable for subsequent coping,” up to a point.
In a study appearing in The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Dr. Cohen Silver, E. Alison Holman, also of the University of California, Irvine, and Mark D. Seery, of the State University at Buffalo, followed nearly 2,000 adults for several years, monitoring their mental well-being with online surveys. The participants, a diverse cross section of Americans between the ages of 18 and 101, listed all of the upsetting life events they had experienced before entering the study and any new ones that hit along the way. These included divorce, the death of a friend or parent, a serious illness, and being in a natural disaster.
Or, none of the above: A subset of the participants, 194, reported that they had experienced not one of the fairly comprehensive list of 37 events on the survey. “We wondered: Who are these people who have managed to go through life with nothing bad happening to them?” Dr. Cohen Silver said. “Are they hyper-conscientious? Socially isolated? Just young? Or otherwise unique?”
They weren’t, the researchers found. Stranger still, they were not the most satisfied with their lives. Their sense of well-being was about the same, on average, as people who had suffered up to a dozen memorable blows.
It was those in the middle, those reporting two to six stressful events, who scored highest on several measures of well-being, and who showed the most resilience in response to recent hits.
In short, the findings suggest that mental toughness is something like the physical strength: It cannot develop without exercise, and it breaks down when overworked. Some people in the study reported having had more than a dozen stressful events, and it showed.
“These people were truly suffering,” Dr. Cohen Silver said, “and we do not minimize in any way the pain of such events when you’re going through them. But it does appear that if you’ve had several such experiences but not too many, you learn something.”
Whike the majority of members on peacepink are truly good people, some are not. Over tbe five years Ive been on peacepink Ive Witnessed plans to kill office workers by someone trying to recruit TIs to drive a suicide bus into a building. I have read where other members support the actions of Myron May and Aaron Alexis, as righteous acts of war.
On Saturday night in open chat, LaBrat openly confessed to having killed at least one person, and tgere arec4 witnesses. This is disturbing, most esPecially because he said he may kill again.
If we claim to be good people, we Must show concern for innocent life. I have reported this confession to the authorities. However the reality is I am not always on to see tgese confessions. It is a community responsibility to assure innocent life is not lost. If you witness a confession of a frime, or intent to commit a crime, copy it to a place off site like your email,mso the moderators wont delete it. They have a history of protecting those who admit to violence.
If you need help in reporting, or are afraid to get involved, contact me David ofTomorrow and I will arange to make the proper reports.
Thanks, and stay safe!
Evidence has shown that regular physical activity can improve cognitive function and brain plasticity. However, research has been unclear in proving how much exercise is needed and how long these benefits can last for. A recent study conducted at the University of Adelaide in Australia suggests that one 30-minute session of vigorous exercise can lead to changes in the brain that make it more “plastic,” including improvements in memory and motor skill coordination.
"Although this was a small sample group, it helps us to better understand the overall picture of how exercise influences the brain,” lead researcher Associate Professor Michael Ridding said in a statement. “We know that plasticity is also important for recovery from brain damage, so this opens up potential therapeutic avenues for patients. Further research will be required to see what the possible long-term benefits could be for patients as well as healthy people."
Ridding and his colleagues recruited a small group of adults in their late 20s and early 30s who were asked to ride exercise bikes for a period of 30 minutes. The team of neuroscientists monitored changes in the brain directly after the exercise session and again 15 minutes later. Results show that even one 30-minute session of physical activity can improve the brain’s plasticity, or its ability to change physically, functionally, and chemically. Positive changes in the brain were sustained 15 minutes after exercising.
"We saw positive changes in the brain straight away, and these improvements were sustained 15 minutes after the exercise had ended," Ridding added. "Plasticity in the brain is important for learning, memory and motor skill coordination. The more 'plastic' the brain becomes, the more it's able to reorganise itself, modifying the number and strength of connections between nerve cells and different brain areas. This exercise-related change in the brain may, in part, explain why physical activity has a positive effect on memory and higher-level functions."
A similar study conducted at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign found that regular exercise can benefit the brain’s supply of white matter, also known as “the subway of the brain” due to its ability to connect different regions of grey matter in the cerebrum to each other. Researchers assessed the link between physical fitness and the brain in 24 9- and 10-year-olds. Children who were more physically fit had thicker and denser white matter, meaning they had a greater capacity for memory, attention span, and cognitive efficiency.
I have to share the spoils of two weeks of sandwich making! Its the nicest jersey in the Pro Shop!! Other 12s were watching with smiles as I put it on!!
GO HAWKS!!! 12!
I worked through v2k and physical assault, but I stayed positive! It was worth it!
Particularly in the 20th century, there have been numerous experiments performed on human test subjects in the United States that have been considered unethical, and were often performed illegally, without the knowledge, consent, or informed consent of the test subjects.
The experiments include: the deliberate infection of people with deadly or debilitating diseases, exposure of people to biological and chemical weapons, human radiation experiments, injection of people with toxic and radioactive chemicals, surgical experiments, interrogation and torture experiments, tests involving mind-altering substances, and a wide variety of others. Many of these tests were performed on children,[1] the sick, and mentally disabled individuals, often under the guise of "medical treatment". In many of the studies, a large portion of the subjects were poor, racial minorities or prisoners.
Funding for many of the experiments was provided by United States government, especially the United States military, Central Intelligence Agency, or private corporations involved with military activities. The human research programs were usually highly secretive, and in many cases information about them was not released until many years after the studies had been performed.
The ethical, professional, and legal implications of this in the United States medical and scientific community were quite significant, and led to many institutions and policies that attempted to ensure that future human subject research in the United States would be ethical and legal. Public outrage in the late 20th century over the discovery of government experiments on human subjects led to numerous congressional investigations and hearings, including the Church Committee and Rockefeller Commission, both of 1975 and the 1994 Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, among others.
Read the rest of this important article here:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentation_in_the_United_States
Dealing with v2k.
Over the 11 years that I have been a Target for research by those who have created the technology and have the motivation to use this incredible technology to harass, torture, and manipulate humans to their ends. AS many know, two of the most often shared symptoms of being a Target are Gangstalking, and v2k. I have experience with both. As well as many other things related to these two seemingly primary tools the enemy uses against us.
There is an important understanding when it comes to the relationship between how these tools are used. When it comes to v2k, it is obvious that there is technology (machinery) that enables our enemy to make us understand their words. Ideas, thoughts…as well as what the AI (BOT, computer program, etc.…) has to put into our brains, and thus often our minds. This is interesting to examine closely. Most Tis who get v2k, find that they can communicate with the enemy by thinking alone! This is two way communication! They are not just inserting words and ideas, they are reading ours as well!
This is a daunting reality for most to face. The idea of dealing with gangstalkers becomes much more complicated considering that those who stalk, harass, play games with, or create street theater, have superiors who can directly feed our thoughts, or relative information from our thoughts, into their actor’sbrains! This ability gives them knowledge of when you leave your home, when you are thinking of trying to ‘capture’ a stalker on camera, or where you will be going.
Now, there are also other things that the enemy can do to a target by use of the v2k mind read/input technological abilities. There are various reasons that using large numbers of people to do what might be called traditional, or Stasi/Cointelpro tactics achieved. Much of the surveillance was to gather data. In our current, modern situation, not only is the NSA and CIA gathering all information from digital media, but there is also the agency that uses the Most Incredible technology in human history. They now gather data directly from our brains!!!
Also, because of the ability the enemy has to insert ideas, and control our emotions, they can easily manipulate our perceptions, thus creating illusions of being followed. Often they will manipulate the sounds of others voices. When strangers speak, the enemy has the ability to manipulate the brain processes that understands sound. They keep the sound of the person, but change the words to theirs. SO, even if you know this person, and know their voice, you will not likely be able to tell that it is a v2k illusion rather than the person who you think it was. This ability allows them to use actual people in any situation, much, much less often, because all the necessary components for harassment are contained in the technological approach. Eliminating g the vast majority of actual human involvement reduces the opportunity of a whistleblower coming forward against what the enemy does.
Understanding how the enemy employs the illusions they impose on us is important. It is often stated among many experienced Tis that when you become fully aware of a trick the enemy uses, they almost always stop using it. It’s like the magician who knows his audience knows the secret to his illusion, so there’s no use in using that particular one. Knowledge is power. The more knowledge we have of our situation, the better off we will be to deal with the things we go through.
Anothe3r tactic the enemy uses is mind controlling others into saying or doing something that you will perceive as gangstalking. The important thing to remember when confronted with this tactic, is that the person has no idea that they are being used! If they are strangers, they will not know you. IF they are not strangers, then they will still not know what they are actually saying. Sometimes they will not even remember they have said it. This tactic also keeps the chances of whistleblowers sprouting because the people involved have been high jacked and manipulated, and therefore have no knowledge of our plight, or of the enemy controlling them.
V2k can include many sounds. I have heard the most incredible sounds effects that the enemy made appear come from the tops of skyscrapers. I thought everyone could hear these sounds because they appeared to emanate from outside my head, but they were actually being created within my brain and had nothing to do with my ears. This ‘outside’ sound is quite different from ‘inside’ the head sound. This is when they seem to talk inside your head, or when they manipulate and change your thoughts. Finally they can make sounds that everyone around you can hear. They don’t do this often, as when there is found to be no source of the sound, then people grow suspicious.
While real people can and do run the machinery attached to us, most often it is a programed AI that is running the show. Since it is humans that decide what the agenda will be for each of us, even by programming the AI, I refer to the source of v2k as ‘they’, even when speaking of AI.
Here are some things to do to deal with v2k:
Whenever you deal with the ongoing programming that the enemy tries to instill in you by v2k, be Strong, and be Stubborn. Know you are right and stand your ground on your beliefs.
Please feel free to add to this list of tools to deal with v2k. AS I remember tools I’ve used, or as I come across new ones, I will add to the list.