The Fatal Flaw within "For-Profit" Education

A while back I read an obscure blog, in which the writer that projected that 2 years from then (about a year from now) the dust will settle and only 5 or so post secondary, "for-profit" schools will be left standing!  The writer did not wager who they would be although the article did mention that it would probably not be those who are the major players today.  The reason that he gave was that they have dug themselves too deep into the "profit" side of the equation...rather than focusing on the benefits that privatization education (capitalizing) could produce...

He called "for profit" the current Great American Experiment...

I personally liked that reference because when one experiments they are looking for certain results under a specific set of circumstances...and uses the experiment to ferret out previously unknown weaknesses in the initial assumptions.  If the experiment is important enough...adjustments to the assumptions are made...and the value of the overall effort reassessed...if the value derived is sufficient, then the experiment continues...if not,,,it  ceases...

Another thing that intrigued me about the blog was that...although it seemed like pure conjecture...it had some excellent data behind it and rather than simple conjecture...it was more like "data-backed prophecy!"

The sad thing is that the blog was quite accurate.

I have tried in vain to relocate it and write a comment related to my retraction of my skeptical, but unspoken opinion of it...when I first read it!  I suggested that the current institutions were too big and important to kill!  I was wrong!  The customers (students and taxpayers) have seemingly had enough and admissions rates are dropping drastically (as he projected)...only those who truly meet their needs are going to survive...

This leads to an interesting (and deeper) thought that I have pondered for some time...

Our educational system (especially the for-profit sector) was given an opportunity to quantum leap above the rest of the world...and it instead it got distracted, greedy, focused on profits and may now be unable to rise above that tide.  This is exactly what was referenced by too much focus on the "for profit" side of the equation rather than on the "education" side...

One company that I worked for in the past, embedded the following axiom in the brains of its employees..."focus on the customer and the money will follow..."  "For Profit" education should take a lesson from them.  This company remains at the top of the Fortune 100 because of this philosophy...and seldom does their profits dwindle...

One of the issues that caused this was the neglect to accurately identify all of the customers and focus on the REAL needs and demands...Students and Stockholders are just the beginning...and there are many more powerful customers that have been totally neglected...

"Easy (low-risk) Money" filled the pockets of many "for profit" executives...with hard-earned taxpayer monies...what little savings the students had...

This growth bolstered their self perceptions of infallibility...and contributed to their misdirection...

That is sad...they are like a child gone wrong!  They had so much potential...

Where did we go wrong?

What was the fatal flaw?

*************************************

I have been reading George Bush's book..."Decision Points."

I found an interesting section ( a few paragraphs) in the book that reflected on the fatal flaws within many of the cultural revolutions (China was emphasized).  The important observation that he made was that the basis for the revolution was appropriate, but the leaderships' self-serving motives quickly took hold and tainted a good thing...often to the detriment of the participants of the cause...

What hit me was that the American Educational System was afforded the opportunity for a cultural revolution.  Now the same drama is playing out in this arena.

Capitalization of this service to America has the ability to provide efficient and effective education, when placed in the hands of creative entrepreneurs.

I realize that within the for-profit arena "margin" and profit needs to be the #1 focus.  It is however that the rules of engagement need to be narrow.  Control is critical to the success.  Capitalization of Education will always reduce itself (by its very nature) to the easiest route to profit.

Without control, the letter of the intent will be followed and the spirit of intent will be ignored.

Participation within this arena needs to be contingent upon providing an effective education to non-traditional students.  I have been reading articles to the contrary.  These institutions are using "lower classed" students as an excuse for their failure.  I agree that individuals who are not accustomed to the educational arena have less of a chance of graduating...(projections say that only about 20% of the students in non-traditional schools have the ability and discipline to succeed), yet this is the challenge that will be met by the organizations that will survivor.

Many of these institutions tout non-traditional education for non-traditional students.  What they are simply providing is a traditional education with a non-traditional delivery system (on line or flex classes).  This takes us back to the customer (student) focus that is required to be successful.

That being...providing the student with what they need to be successful...rather than what we want them to do...so that we profit (from the organizational perspective)...

It is that sensitivity and awareness that will lead to success!

How many of these institutions realize that the ultimate customer within this complex equation is the taxpayer...we are paying for our fellow citizens to get an advanced education and contribute advanced skills to our society...failure is not an option...When you are a steward of the taxpayers' money, failure is not an option...it is treason!

These institutions have to stop lobbying for relief for the proposed standards...and use their creative capitalistic skills to meet and exceed customer needs!  All of the customers!  It is their obligation for getting involved in this enterprise...

We should not have to tell them what the rules are...but if they refuse to live up to the spirit of the intent...then...

1 - Retain the students that the have committed to...
2 - Graduate Students at a rate equal to or better than traditional institutions
3 - Make a Profit while they provide these services to America
4 - Drive these students to Gainful Employment and stay committed until they are gainfully employed
5 - Partner in ensuring that these student repay their loans...to the extent that they refund the taxpayer if the Loan Default occurs

That is good corporate citizenship...anything else is a travesty...

I can just hear the current schools screaming that they can not survive if these standards were placed upon them.  I do not believe that is so!  For every complainer there is another institution with truly committed American citizens that can step up and say...now that we know the rules of engagement...let's meet and exceed the challenge.

It is the American attitude of "can do!" institutions that will make "for profit" education what it was meant (in spirit) to be.  The others will fade away as prophesied in that blog...

The fatal flaw is not a genetic flaw...but a fatal virus that is not prevalent in all institutions...

Some of the current institutions are immune because of their leaderships' adherence to the spirit of the intent and not the letter...These are the institutions that will survive...

The others will grow more and more ill...they will be unable to function...complain, reduce their staffing and finally die...it sorrows me to think of this happening...

I truly want to see "for profit" education succeed.  It has its place in our society...

Its spirit provides it with tools giving it the ability to do what traditional schools are inherently incapable of doing...

The fatal flaw?

Narrow focus...on the wrong side of the equation!

The antidote?

Our "for profit" institutions must focus on the Spirit and not the Letter of the law and their obligations...

One will never fail when that is achieved!

****************************************

What does this specific example have to do with 21st Century Philosophy?

The roots of the concept is actually an 18th Century concept that was promoted by the American Founding Fathers!

They recognized the infallibility of man and his "laws"

They also recognized that there were specific "unalienable" truths that they may know but can not fully explain...

A true citizen adheres to the spirit of these laws and not to the letter of the written law...

"One who personally profits from a poorly written law, while recognizing the spirit of its intent is no citizen of this...our society..."

The 21st Century citizen, whether American or Global...needs to identify and exceed the spirit of the law's intent...rather than squandering that time...looking for loopholes and ways to personally profit...

This 18th Century concept needs to be rejuvenated...and brought back to the forefront of every 21st Century activity...

...If not...we are not citizens of this society or any...and should be treated that way!

******************************************

Enough Said!







      

Global Responsibility...

I have to rant for a moment or two!  Please forgive me!

I recently read a philosophy blog claiming to have "cracked" the argument for "free will."  It was poorly written and even worse...it had major flaws in its logic...elementary flaws...I would be embarrassed to even print it on paper, let alone put it on the Internet for the world to see...I do hope that he is not proud of that work or that he does not go around arguing that case...

I will not provide the link, or even mention this individual's name...he is not a philosopher and like many people who purport to be something and are nothing more than "wanna-bes."  They give good things a bad name...

This blog is written by, what I would call an elementary school philosophy "wanna-be."  He tried to logically develop an argument for freewill.  If I were his professor...I would give him an "F!".  In short, his logic concluded with...since we do not know all of the details necessary for us to totally understand cause and effect...then freewill has to be a valid option.  I bet that he didn't realize that he said...since we are stupid...we have the right to believe in magic!

That is right...all he made was two arguments for stupidity...first that he was arrogant enough to believe that humans are smart enough to know everything to the extent that they fully understand cause and effect.  That was simply an argument for how stupid mankind remains in relation to the universe of knowledge.  He went so far as to quote Einstein out of context and call that an admission that mankind is incapable of understanding all of the details...therefore cause and effect does not exist...

Second his argument itself was so stupid...it stood as an example of stupidity!

It saddens me to see someone call themselves a philosopher and through their very existence bring a mockery to the science of thought...

A while back when Cray super-computers were the best thing around...a scientist was able to use all of the computing power of a network of Crays without interfering with any of the other work being done with them...HOW? 

He realized that the computational power being used was always in the binary pulses of the clock.  What the rest of the world had missed is that a binary pulse is the movement from 0 to +1 and them it resets from +1 to 0 to do the next calculation.  He began computing in the nulls or voids.  There was an entire world of computation available to him...and he tapped it...if I remember correctly...he used that available resource to calculate "pi" to some extraordinary level of accuracy...that broke some new frontiers for physicists...

That scientist was able to tap into an entire world of computational power because he was not blinded by "fact."  He as able to see the world of the "nulls" and redefine computational power...that world existed before it was discovered...and remains in every PC today!

Before Columbus...(or whoever you want to believe) discovered the new world...it existed...

Many of the weather issues confronting Europe came from the new world...it was an unknown source...that didn't mean that Europe didn't have weather before the discovery of the new world...

Using that prior pseudo-philosophers argument...since we can never calculate "Pi" to its final number...it doesn't exist...

This is not the logic of a philosopher...let alone a 21st century philosopher!

It was a sad case a VERY narrow and works toward a pre-supposed conclusion, rather than looking at the world and learning new things from what we know...

My thought...

One of the characteristics that I see missing from most people that are competing for the 21st Century Philosopher title...is the perspective of Global Citizenship or Responsibility...

We still live in an age that demands global responsibility from its allies and diplomatically handles its enemies.  The laws are rather obscure and non-conformance to them leads to actions that are punitive in nature...monetary sanctions...and ultimately war...

There is no basic and immutable set of global responsibilities.

More so is the lack of recognition that we have progressed beyond simple reward/punishment reactions.

Absolute Determinism

The 21st century philosopher must take into account discoveries from the sciences to ensure a relevant scheme.  It was much more simple to create a philosophical school when the world was narrow and infantile.  Our knowledge of the world around us has become broader and deeper...that puts an entirely new standard on any epistemology.

The simple concept of cause/effect and the discoveries in physics and cosmology along with the human genome project and psychology put philosophy into and entirely new context.  One that is essential to continuous improvement of our society and a step towards future existence...

Consider that fact that all causes and effects determine the physical world as we know it and that there is no other option.

"It is what it is..." becomes a fact...

Since the motion of matter at the moment of creation...there was no other set of options...

Anything that "Matters" (pun somewhat intended) was predetermined...

We delude ourselves into believing that there are options...  

Our present is totally determined by the past...and the future by a combination of the past and the present...

The 21st century philosophy must account for the fact that we are where we at because of the almost infinite chain of cause and effect from the past...

That chain is no isolated and independent....but globally large!

Some of the interactions that created one's make-up may have occurred galaxies away...

The materials within our bodies were created within stars...long dead!

Those atoms made their way into our solar system and on to the earth...and then into your body...

The global awareness...in fact universal awareness...is critical...

Our actions and reactions can affect others continents away...in fact...millions of years from now...perhaps life on some other planet!

We are caught within a chain of cause and effect...

Freewill?

I do not know...

I can make a case either way...

I do not know if it matters...as long as the decisions that are made are the right ones...

The 21st century philosophy should be less focused upon whether or not freewill exists and more focused upon making the right choices...which I believe are really the only thing a person has an obligation to do...

A Poison By Any Other Name Is Still A Poison

I seldom write commentaries related to specific politics...

I believe in integrity...of consistency of behavior related to a foundational set of tenants...but this one hit me hard the other day!

Every American is aware of...President Obama signing into law the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010.”

This is not an article touting the benefits of the act or its potential dangers…we’ll leave that to the politicians…

What hit me was the name!

A History Channel moment…

Way back when…men found women with dilated pupils attractive…

Although there may be some interesting psychological discussions about that attraction…this is not about that…

About the same time they found that one of the first symptoms of nightshade poisoning was dilated pupils!  In small quantities the people ingesting poison nightshade exhibited this alluring trait!  Although it sounds diabolical...poison nightshade became a cosmetic drug!

Women were smarter than men thought and wouldn’t take it just to dilate their pupils…until some genius renamed it belladonna!  The interpretation of the word is "beautiful woman"…the reality was that it was belladonna was still poison nightshade! 

However, the name change had the desired effects....because a new name conveyed the message that what was in it was new and harmless too!  Women began taking belladonna (what they were led to believe was a substitute for nightshade) without realizing that it was still the same poison.  

Many died or were physically impaired by this simple medieval marketing ploy.

Fast Forward to the 21^st Century…

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will be systematically implemented over the next 10 years.  In 2014 is when the majority of this will hit…even this is a political delay tactic…but we’ll leave this in the hands of the politicians…

The name bothers me…it looks and smells like the poison nightshade conspiracy of the middle ages!

I am not a conspiracy theorist and believe that most so-called conspiracies are the result of paranoia...

I do not want it to come off like I believe that it will lead to the death of America…we’ll leave that to the politicians…who now have to implement it...

It is the words used…”Protection” and “Affordable” bother me.  They are "marketing words" used to make this more appealing to a public that might not wish to ingest the poison that it may contain...these are words that elicit emotions...rather than convey a definitive meaning...

I really would like to know who crafted that name…this person should be put on equal ground with the person who came up with the name belladonna! 

Why am I making such a big deal about this?  It is because things like this reek of deception and dishonesty.  A move to appeal to a mass of people who do not have the time or the ability to read the ingredients of what they are being forced to consume...   

Our politicians are well meaning and although they may aspire to provide “protection” at “affordable” rates…it sounds like a late night commercial by some fly-by-night insurance company…or one of those emails that you get from Nigeria saying that they have 13 million US dollars in a bank account for you.

Call a horse a horse.  Call an apple an apple. A Congressional Act by what it is...

If this is an Act that someone is proud of...call it by the name of the person who sponsored it...if it is truly a legacy...then...

Let’s call this the The President's Citizen Healthcare Act or something that it really is.  It will go down in history...Let's not forget where it came from...

I am tired of marketing…straight-talk is what the American Citizens want and deserve…regardless of political affiliation...let’s hold our politicians to their pledges!  I continue to trust our leaders...  They can step up and put their name on it...  It is their right and obligation...  When you put your name on something...it forces you to a new level of responsibility and performance...  I do not know of any sane person that wants his name to go down in history for a failure...

Enough Said!  


What do you think?

More Thoughts on Choice

**********************************

FACT - Beggars Can't be Choosers...Another 21st century need...

Now that is an interesting thought!

Most of the time, I have a "spin" on traditionally accepted axioms...

...This time...I think...I have to agree with it...

The 21st century has to engage with the real meaning of that axiom...

If the members of this society do not engage it...we will end up with a minority working to support the majority...

That would be a sad state of affairs...

The current state is the product of what I have called...the "everyone deserves a trophy" mentality...

I have opposed this from the very beginning...

Adulthood and responsibility means getting what one deserves for their actions and behavior...

Before I jump ahead of myself...let's go back...to that axiom...and show the insanity of entitlement...

*************************************

Let's start with the definition of what or who is a beggar...

Rather than belabor the point that can be easily made without a long logical dissertation...let's conclude...

A beggar is anyone who is not making a tangible contribution to those who support them...

These are individuals who get something undeserved...

This can happen in a microcosm as small as a couple's relationship, a family or as large as the world itself...

Beggars are individuals who get their needs fulfilled without earning it...

Given that thought...If an individual expects a return larger than the contribution that they make to their world...these individuals also become beggars!  Let me remind you that the contribution must be tangible.

Given the fact that the contribution is tangible, it falls into the realm of net value.  One can not do 3 bad (costly) things and 1 good thing of equal value and expect a return on their contribution.  

Although one would like to be the judge of value...the truth is...the value judgement is external to the contributor,,,

Any compensation in return for the contribution that is of greater value than the contribution is a gift...

Gifts fall into the realm of a beggar's purvey...

What a beggar receives can not be rightfully judged as inappropriate...or inadequate...

...because it is gift...

A gift can be rejected...but...

A gift can not be expected...

and if rejected...it can not be expected that it will be replaced...

A beggar has a choice to accept or reject the gift...but if the gift relates to fulfilling a need...rejecting the gift...is pure insanity...or suicide!

In reality...there is no choice related to a gift provided to fulfill a need...the beggar must accept it...

Therefore there is no choice from that perspective...

**************************************

Now we need to look at choice itself...

If simply to prove the point from another perspective...

We wrongly believe that the freedom of choice is related to age!

When an individual becomes an adult...they are entitled to the freedom of choice...

If choice is dependent upon one's contribution...(an earned right)...

If an individual is not contributing...they do not have the right to choose!

The contribution is relative to maturity...(the ability to contribute)...

If an individual contributes more...they should be afforded more freedom...those who contribute less are afforded less freedom...for those who do not contribute...they are afforded the basic freedoms or none at all...

In this context, self-determination is not a right...but compensation...it is earned...and at any given point it is a sum zero proposition...and can be lost through irresponsible behavior or lack of activity that adds value....this falls into the realm of a felony...which will be addressed later...

Interesting thoughts...

Enough Said!

**********************************

The True Loss of Citizenship

Citizenship and Responsibility (An Extremist View that Logically Makes Sense to me)

There exists a confusion about the Rights afforded by the Constitution.  An interesting position found within our Constitution is that if an individual does not adhere to the "major" laws of the state or the federal government and is found guilty, they are convicted of a felony.  If found guilty...they lose the rights of citizenship.  There is an interesting logic...if a person is found guilty of a felony...they are guilty of treason...

With that conviction comes the loss of the rights of a citizen, such as the right to gun ownership, or the right to vote.  In essence, an individual who can not conform to the laws have abdicated their citizenship...ALL RIGHTS AS A CITIZEN.

Over time (perhaps through the influence of situational ethics) the penalties related have been diluted.

Application of Constitutional law...in all honesty...should be that if an individual is felonious, they have intentionally abdicated their citizenship through the commission of a a serious crime against society, unless vindicated...It would be cool to deport them, but that is pawning off "bad-blood" on another country. This is not the point

I believe that the 21st century society needs to go back to basic Constitutional interpretation, in relation to felons (those who by that basic definition, have given up their citizenship) and we (as a society) continue to pay the price for their existence in our society (which should be minimized, because they guests (however unwelcome) and should no longer be afforded any rights as a citizens.

One such thing is the "right" to a speedy trial."  This is afforded to all law-abiding citizens (until convicted), but a felon no longer deserves such a "right."

Another is that a felon (who is no longer a citizen)  has given up his or her "right to a fair trial"...and citizen-like treatment under out law.  A felon should be treated as guilty until proven innocent...putting the burden of evidence upon the felon rather than the government...(thus saving the taxpayer's money for justice to citizens).

Think about a felon being "guilty until they prove that they are innocent"...or...that they get a trial when "we" have time!

Turning the tables and focusing on the responsibilities and rights related to citizenship and the cost related to not fulfilling those responsibilities would have many good downstream effects!

I have to think more about this...but the constitutional perspective is sound...we have simply gotten soft on our interpretation...we may need to go to its full intent to extract all of the brilliance of it...and its creators!

US citizenship, or citizenship for that matter is a membership...and a commitment to abiding by the laws of the society.  It is an exclusive club...with a wide open membership...citizens are obligated by the rules of membership...the government is obligated to uphold those laws in return...

There are more ramifications related to taking this stance...we'll discuss them in the next submission...



   

The 21st Century Philosopher - A Reductionist?

In a previous submission...we discussed the basic political philosophy of our government and how that relates to the 21st century philosopher.  There is a difficult balance that must be sought with social responsibility and individual rights and freedoms.

The guiding principal for the individual is ethics and morality...it makes everyone a "church."

This makes the goal of the separation of church and state rather difficult...unless there is a realization that an individual has a right to be a "church" (which by my definition is an adherent to a certain set of ethical and moral standards)...has no right to stand in judgement of any other "church" (individual). 

The right of and to judgement lies only in the realm of God (an external higher standard, not necessarily a higher being).  That is why..."In God we trust..."

The 21st Century philosopher does not have to discover this concept...simply advocate it in a voice that can be heard...our founding fathers have already embedded this within our Constitution...

This drives equality...it eliminates prejudice...quells discrimination...and on and on!

You may pose..."The United States...is only one of nearly 200 nations...why should we believe that we have the "better" position?"

The US was and continues to be the "Grand Experiment."

It is not that we are better...but have a foundational philosophy that is dynamic and capable of supporting human rights...

Let the others watch and learn...

The 21st Century philosopher does not have to be American...but should at least be an adherent of this type of philosophy (at minimum) or a better one...

******************************

One of the characteristics of the 21st century is its complexity...

This is not an epiphany...just an observation...

Complexity often is an opiate and by its very nature it draws people further from basic truths...

Although people are searching for and refining truth...it seems to be growing at a geometrical rate....

As truths are discovered...they are often refined and guarded with "exclusions and exceptions."

Rather than creating truths with qualifiers...we should be working towards refinement in the other direction..that is searching for the basic elements and universal applications.  Truth should be getting more  simple...not more complex...

In a way...the 21st Century philosopher should be chasing the basics...rather than trying to amass the world's knowledge!

***********************************

I have yet to find a philosopher in the century that can express the answers with a beauty and elegance similar to the Theory of Relativity...

If answers of this brilliance and universally understanding are to be found in this world...I imagine them to be coming from the 21st century philosopher...

As Einstein reduced the universe's behavior into 5 characters...the philosopher should also...

Yet most that I read are more concerned with sounding intelligent than being understood...

I contend that the true 21st century philosopher is a reductionist!

Who's in Control?

Man has sought control over his destiny since the very beginning...

Maslow recognized that the survival instinct is at the very base of our existence...

Across the ages this has been one of the compelling questions...and it continues to be today

Some end with a complete abdication of control to a higher entity...while others have given full responsibility to the individual...

After some thought I believe that the middle road is applicable to the 21st century!

Let's look into the the life cycle of a single individual...to understand why I have come to this conclusion... 

At the moment of birth, a human has absolutely no control...

This quickly changes...the infant discovers that they can get fed or have discomforts eased through crying!

Crying actually causes the mother to produce milk!

This need of control (which is self-serving) does not subside as the infant matures...in fact it expands...(all for self-serving purposes)

We recognize this as individuals trying to "spread their wings"...

At some point in the maturity process...the child believes that they have sufficient control and they leave the protection of their parents...

It is at that point that many realize that the control that they thought they had...was an illusion...

It was not that they lost control upon leaving...but that they no longer lived under a umbrella or protection that shielded them from the consequences of misguided control or poor decisions!

Let's stop here for a few sentences and step back...to get a better understanding of control...

Control is an interesting concept...

Most believe that control is defined as the ability to make choices...and the timing of said choices...

In its most basic form...this is true...(we'll come back to this)

I, however, have a tendency to start by reducing or limiting control or choices by referring to Plato's logic...

For the sake of brevity...this argument is available in Plato's Republic...

His conclusion was..."We are free to only do the good..."

Freedom (hence control) for any activity, other than good...is not really freedom (control)...

I prefer to begin at this point, because it already reduces the control (freedom) that we have...

Having said that...let's go into what I was thinking...

Control and freedom are closely related...

In fact, when freedom disappears...so too does control...

Control (as previously, but briefly stated) is in three separate categories...

What one does...

How well one does what they choose to do...AND...

When, what one chooses to do, is done

What one does...

The "what" has been answered by Plato!

Plato concludes that one is free (in control) only when they are doing "good."

I have to add that there may be a few instances in which the "what" does not affect anything external to the individual exercising control...and then full control is with that individual...(this needs a bit more thought and discussion).

How well one does what they choose to do...

As previously stated...unless the "what" one is doing affects only the person doing it...which is seldom the case...the "How well one does it" is determined externally from the do'er!

This is important because the first part of understanding the middle road conclusion is found here!

The only time that the do'er has control over "how well it is done" is when the internal or personal standard of performance meets or exceeds that of the external standard.

What that means that the "good" is defined initially by those externally affected by the choice and it remains the standard of performance...unless the standard of performance on the individual (doing the choosing) is higher than and exceeds that of the external...   

This opens up another discussion that will be pursued at a later time (pertaining to the definition of good).

It is a logical conclusion that the do'er has abdicated control...if their standard is less than the external standard...because their choice of how well it is done...

For someone to say "that is the way I do it" as an excuse for substandard performance...is immature and moving towards the standard definition of social insanity...

Interesting thought...isn't it...

One is rightly free to "be a unique individual" (have control) only when they can perform beyond the level of expectations of "the rule makers!"

Now let's move to the final area of control...

"When (the timing of ) the choice is done..."

Using the previous logic...

An individual has full control of their behavior prior to the point of expected delivery of results...from the external standard...

That means that as long as a person is "ahead of schedule"...they have full control over "when they do it..."

This changes however...and...

They again abdicate control after the time of delivery (by the external expectation)...it is at this point that they can no longer "call the shots!"

At that point...the external standard gets full control!

Another interesting thought!

So let's now draw this all into a single scheme...

What does this all mean to us?

Control is fully in an individuals arena prior to the external expected standard...

delivery...and if the individual's standard of performance is higher than the external standard...

If an individual is trying attempting to exercise control their life...their performance standards need to be shifted higher and sooner than the external expectations...

If they do not shift their personal performance standards...they can not expect to have control...because by definition they have abdicated it to the external standard...

Interesting thought...and enough said on this series of thoughts...

Across the ages...their have been numerous skeptics that put control into the hands of "entities," secret organizations, or conspiracies...or in the hands of God or "the gods."



This means that they abdicated control to these entities (real or unreal)

Rather than recognizing that control can be maintained by ascribing to a higher standard...than the perceived external source...

The paranoia of conspiracy theorists...is internally driven...by their "sub-standards!"

Now this leads me to another aspect that is interesting and somewhat related!

Consequences!

Individuals, especially the immature, desire to do what they want (control) and not have to suffer the consequences for their decisions...

A great case in point...teenagers!

I want to play rather than study...

A VERY hedonistic and emotionally immature behavior...

Our teen in question plays rather than studies...with total disregard to the outcome...

Then when the grades come out...they do not want the consequences...another emotionally immature behavior

or...

They make excuses...

or...

They want the external entities to forgive them...or "cut the slack."

Many are not willing to expend the additional effort in the present to rectify what their past decision predicated...

This is the recourse related to seeing that control has a dual nature...and that there is a definite point at which control is intentionally or unintentionally abdicated...

Many times individuals are not able to (or intentionally refuse to) see many related outcomes related to abdicating control...

Bad grades...no auto insurance discount...

The external entities refuse to pay non-discounted insurance rates...when the choice for good grades was in control of the individual...

therefore...now the individual who abdicated control...needs to get a job to offset the cost of their decision to play rather than do homework...

The immature conclusion would be to want an external entity to make it all better for them...

Our society has called the behavior of the external entity "tough love."  It is actually the logical and right response...

Many enablers would simply abdicate their responsible control in reverse to an undeserving individual by paying the insurance premiums...

I have ridden this horse to death!

"Who is in control?" is an interesting 21st century concept.

There is control for the individual...but there is also a point of abdication.

Claiming total control or total lack of control are positions at the extreme ends of the philosophical spectrum...and not representative of reality or functional within our societies...

Enough said...for now!