Re: NSPIC = Neuro-Semantic Political Illusion Complex

Jim Legg (jimekus@usa.net)
Tue, 23 Sep 1997 10:20:24 +1200

Keith Elis ('Hagbard Celine') wrote:
>
> NSPIC is a nice catchy little title, but if you're going to post
> something that long, at least give me some specifics about the theory.
> Words have meanings. Sometimes more than one. You're suggesting that
> by
> using a word in a certain way, I may be reinforcing the illusions of
> Statism.
....
> Your major breakthrough sounds awfully duplicative. Where do you
> diverge
> from or develop on Deep Anarchy? What discursive constructions are the
> "worst?" What are the specific illusions reinforced by them? Why among
> your seven lines of inquiry for debate is it assumed that the theory
> cannot be falsified?
>
ANALYSIS:

The NSPIC debate itself MAY NOT identify all the elements of NSPIC DUE
TO the current
style of the Extropy Institute AND the objections of the current form of
Statism AGAINST
developing the means to communicate about NSPIC to extropians.

To improve the formulation of NSPIC WITHOUT the difficulty of adapting
existing belief
systems AND the need to obtain Consensus AI CAN identify the thinking
skills needed to
transcend NSPIC.

The time required to implement AND to identify the barriers to
understanding NSPIC AND
to outline the benefits gained from understanding and transcending NSPIC
IS BEST
SERVED BY identification of a series of steps to transcend NSPIC USING
the Freeware
called The Ingrid Thought Processor.

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~income/ekus/nspic.html