group-mind illusion

I’ll start this off with two omissions.

Of late we have heard a lot of the orange-drone-voice-man and his quest for Swedish Krona. The body language of his interaction with Vlad the Impaler has been dissected, no doubt for a fee, in various outlets. Not one of them has thought to mention that Putin is a dan grade judoka. Probably none of these body-language experts have been on the mat. If like Putin you are a lifelong judoka you cannot but help assessing where the centre of gravity of people is. This includes during handshakes. Instinctively one adjusts position and weight to see how another responds. A player of with-caddy-cart 18 hole golf has a different mentality to a judoka. Always there is an inkling of what throw one might attempt. A golfer might not anticipate this. Putin might one day step in for an Ipponseionage and bam…Putin will always be a judoka to the core.

Unless I am mistaken the history of the tribes of Israel as per the old-testament speaks of the wrath and retribution of God. There is Divine intervention on a biblical scale. Right now Israel is going biblical on Gaza. Maybe they have checked this out with God and he is on board, maybe not. If he is unhappy with this bellicose vengeance he might have to intervene. I have not heard this aspect discussed. But large scale divine intervention is a part of their religious hagiography. Maybe God is no longer as important as Netanyahu.

–

–

As an old fart in rural Brittany there is no reason why anyone might take me seriously, even were my observations apt and applicable. This is because I am not famous nor am I a big cheese. I do not have thousands of followers on this internet thingy. If you are a nobody, nobody takes you seriously. You have to have a gang, a club, a peer group or be properly institutionalised. It is possible that people who have been in the same institution for several decades might imagine me the lunatic!! Life has a few quirks.

I don’t think that golfer boy is noting a shift in the way the world is. He is a bit too stuck in the past. He does not have a wide encompassing view of humanity as a whole.

As a rule of thumb people give the most credence to people who are relatively close to them physically, their colleagues, who think in a similar manner. They like what they hear back so they take it seriously. Anyone outside can be seen as misguided, an enemy even. Their views and opinions are not taken seriously, they are discounted. Even people who know intellectually about this prejudice cannot resist it. It is a fundamental flaw of group-think and group-mind. Peer “pressure” is way more powerful than we care to acknowledge. The desire to not rock the boat and to comply is endemic.

“Which idiot would dare to put their head above the parapet?”

If anyone did, they would only be taken seriously posthumously and in retrospect. Genius is most often ascribed posthumously and with hindsight. Rarely is it proclaimed in vivo. Everyone knows this and yet repeats history by non-acceptance and in some cases derision.

Things must not be too different in order to be taken seriously!

–

–

The obvious question here is why do unicorns always point to the right?

Some people do not like those who have a different perspective from them, they resist hearing it and in any way assimilating. They just can’t or won’t take divergent views seriously.

—————————————————————————————–

Do people have to see the world in a similar way to you in order for you to take them seriously?

Must everyone think just like you?

————————————————————————————–

Shaw suggested that the primary problem with communication was/is the illusion that it is taking or has taken place.

People rarely bear this in mind. They tend to imagine and assume. They can imagine communication to be good and effective when it is anything but.

There is a big problem in groups. Communication within a group feels like communication has happened but communication outside of the group has not even started. That decided in a group is rarely discussed or conveyed outside the group. Acceptance and agreement is assumed outside the group because consensus has been arrived at in group. It can be a huge surprise that no inclusion outside of group has ever happened. It is a group-mind illusion.

We might call this the crony problem.

As a speculative example. It is possible that health care professionals are discussing my case amongst themselves and maybe one day, someone will have to present it as a fait accompli to me. I will not have been involved in the discussion and therefore very unlikely to trust or accept the fait accompli just because someone said so. If I feel by-passed or ignored then my response is unlikely to be compliant-acceptant. Because discussion has occurred within peer group the illusion of communication is solid and held to be true perceptually. There is in this case a national and language barrier to boot and add icing. Inter group consensus amongst the French is important to them as far as I can see. Foreigners are less important.

I have noted multiple variations on this theme over the years. Where “they” discuss me, maybe conclude and then never even mention it to me or check their understanding of me with me. I am not being paranoid. I have anecdotal evidence in a number of cases.

–

–

Last Monday I had a CT scan of my chest and lungs prescribed by a lung specialist. Given my asthma, COPD and past history as a smoker, this is not a routine low risk screening. There are some results in my spirometry which need an explanation.

I am yet to receive the narration of the results from the consultant radiologist.

I have had a week in which to down load the images, start a loan of some medical CT imaging software and investigate the CT data. I have access to fibre broad band and can do AI image searches on CT snapshots. I have used the software to measure the dimensions of the (hopefully) bony growth on my thoracic spine and can see that it impinges upon my right lung. {This explains a slight niggle I have had there for a number of years.} I can read articles in medical journals like “The Lancet” and have a fair understanding of the gist.

I have watched videos of radiological grading of COPD, lung nodules and lung cancer staging. I have investigated diagnosis of the bony growth and it looks as though diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) is the best putative diagnosis. I already know that this growth cannot be reversed. I have identified one lung nodule and think I can see where my ribs, broken in a rugby injury, have healed.

I have no idea who is meant to follow up, if at all. I am in a vacuum.

Any subsequent conversation is unlikely to be aware or informed by/of the scope of my investigations. I’ll speculate that it will not be assumed to be thorough.

Any initial point of subsequent communication will have assumptions on each side.

I have asked that if there is anything important someone gets in touch. Silence suggests that there is no problem. This assumption could be fundamentally flawed in a clinically significant manner. People are busy and in medicine often pressure prompted. The body on the table in front of you is more important that the one in a computer file and the end of a telephone line.

The whole thing, like so many things here grinds to a halt of inertia. Who knows who is responsible or is in charge of taking this forward?

Loose…means that balls get dropped…and then it is very hard to overcome the inertia once more…

Laisser tomber – BOF….