Arkbo Music Publishing

Hi, I am the Foolish Philosopher and today I have something particularly foolish for you. It is a philosophy regarding raising children. What if as a parent or caregiver you make your primary objective to make your child nice. Humans and that includes children are created from a mixture of biological and cultural forces. I would argue competition is a potent biological motivation driving the behaviour of any child. The nature of this competitive urge is determined via cultural influences. This could be derived from both society in general or the specific family unit.  A child may wish to compete at tennis, mathematics or computer games for example. Research has shown reward is a far superior motivator to punishment. Dr Eveline Crone’s 2008 study shows this is particularly true of children below the age of 12. An effective way to shape a child’s behaviour is to utilise their natural motivational systems like competition and apply reward for desired behaviour. What if you provided outrageous reward for altruistic behaviour. I am personally fascinated by altruism which is defined as selfless concern for the well-being of others. What if your basic Child rearing philosophy was to create young altruistic individuals using natural competitive urges. Reward was only provided for doing nice things like caring for others, being kind, listening to people and putting others before yourself. Returning to our example this wouldn't be to deprive the child of the chance to play tennis, instead rewarding the child for altruistic behaviour on the tennis court, in favour of rewarding the child for winning or demonstrating talent. 

At this point you may be thinking this is a recipe for creating people very open to manipulation by individuals with more selfish agendas. Here is an example why I beg to differ. I know a particular individual, I am going to change his name to Ronald for the purpose of this example, and my wife and I have described him as the nicest guy you would ever be likely to meet. My wife even put this assertion to his wife. You may expect her response to be along the lines of “Oh he has his moments” instead she confided “I know, I even take advantage of it myself. After dinner I often think if I wait 1 more minute Ronald will get up and do the washing up” The truth is she is also a wonderful human being with a similar philosophy and altruistic nature. Is it a coincidence Ronald was successful in attracting such a wonderful life partner? I would say not. Is it a coincidence Ronald’s face is never devoid of a smile? I would say not. Is it a coincidence Ronald is universally liked, respected, admired and even successful. I would say not. 

The cognitive trade off theory; a theory which focuses on a possible explanation to the adaptive cognitive development of chimpanzees comparative to our species implies human kind’s greatest achievement is socialisation. It is the ability to work together, communicate and share in order to overcome life’s obstacles. This continued collaboration lead to the development of language, symbols and all our impressive technologies. Why wouldn’t this continue to scale in modern society? Do competitive, individualistic goals promote egocentricity, narcissism and loneliness? Do altruistic community based goals promote collaboration, self esteem, well being and happiness? What if the most effective strategy to improve one’s personal situation is to look out for everyone other than number 1. My assertion is selfishness may promote short term success but altruism is a framework suiting long term in fact life long success. Teaching your child to place the needs of others before their own will make people like them, want to be around them and most importantly offer them opportunities. 

Looking at a child’s development from the perspective of cultural influence, the early and formative years are overwhelmingly dominated by parental direction. This allows opportunity to instil a strong desire to serve others using a reward system. Imagine being able to utter this sentence, “because you were  so considerate of Mummy’s feelings you can now, as a reward do something nice for daddy”. As the child ages general society will become an increasingly greater 
Influence upon your child. This will undoubtedly offer challenges but it will also offer opportunities to orientate the rewards offered by society from a less egocentric perspective. They will already be armed with the ability to understand the point of view of others. This is invaluable for long term life success. 

Upon asking elderly people to identify regrets and things they may have done better. The answers always focus on connections with others and building relationships. What better gift could you give your child than imparting the wisdom of well travelled people whom have somewhat unravelled the mysteries and secrets of life. 

“Nice guys finish last” is a catchphrase used to promote the benefits of selfish behaviour. I have an alternate perspective to this concept. Research studies including Michael J. Poulin’s five-year multi-institutional study demonstrates giving and unselfish behaviour not only helps others, but provides a positive health benefit by reducing stress, even prolonging the lives of the altruistic. Hence Nice guys finish last

The Niels Bohr Song 

Neil Armstrong, Neil Diamond even Neil Young 
thought they had it all worked out that you know they got it wrong. 
I before E except after C they would have learned in school 
But Neil starts with an N, it doesn't start with a C, despite exception to the rule 
There is one man who got it foiled. Opened the quantum door. 
Even got his spelling right they call him Niels Bohr. 

One Neil is Neil, but Niels is more. 
Twice the man of Einstein possibly even four. 
So put your hands together the great Niels Bohr. 
You have to add an S to his name because plural is more. 

Atomic models, electrons orbits radiation jump. 
Periodic table, he made it stable then there is Hafnium. 
The Nobel prize before his eyes 1922. 
he should have got more is his name implies that's the bohring truth. 

One Neil is Neil, but Niels is more. 
Twice the man of Einstein possibly even four. 
So put your hands together the great Niels Bohr. 
You have to add an S to his name because plural is more. 

Copenhagen, interpretation, observation who? 
Waves goodbye particles die, reality splits in two. 
Heisenberg hat, schrodinger's cat, unintuitive rules. 
Dualism, pluralism, fission for some realism. Niels Bohr became two. 

One Neil is Neil, but Niels is more. 
Twice the man of Einstein possibly even four. 
So put your hands together the great Niels Bohr. 
You have to add an S to his name because plural is Bohr. 

https://arkbomusicpublishing.com/the-foolish-philosopher

Hi, I am the Foolish Philosopher. Today's video is part of the series Foolish Questions. These are somewhat silly questions which pop into my brain for no reason at all and to which I don't know the answer and perhaps has no answer but perhaps you know the answer. in which case I would encourage you to pop the answer into the comment section below or perhaps leaving an insight or further questions on this topic or a totally unrelated topic. Here is today's question. 
Let’s say we had two rectangles. Rectangle A has a width of X and rectangle B has a width of 2X. Both rectangles have a length of infinity. Is it possible to 
measure the area for either rectangle and 
prove that rectangle B is larger than rectangle A or vice versa? 

Perhaps a bonus question might be what effect would X being a negative integer have upon the rectangles and the comparative relationship between rectangles. Essentially the question is can various degrees of infinity manifest in reality. If you take the set of counting numbers comparatively against the set of odd numbers is one infinite set greater than the other? Intuitively it seems one is larger and yet they are both the same. How can we be sure of this? 

I hope you enjoyed this foolish question. There are various links to websites, social media  and content sharing platforms for you to watch, read and listen to various foolish questions or foolish thoughts or foolish songs. 
So don’t forget to subscribe, follow, share, like, comment or you can help support this foolish work on the provided links to my website or Patreon. 
To quote William Shakespeare “A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.”

What if reality equals the mean of all perspectives of all conscious beings?

So if x = all conscious beings 

Reality = perspectivex/x 

Lets begin on an individual level. Each individual develops their own perspective based upon their unique individual experiences. This perspective is derived from that individual’s interpretation of their experiences through the lens of their personal senses. It is only via consciousness that the individual can begin to make sense of their experiences. What if consciousness has an entry price? Not only does it interpret what goes into the individual, creating who they are, also interpreting what comes out of the individual. What if consciousness is a system of reporting the individual's perspective to a greater consciousness that is accessible by all conscious beings. It is difficult to argue against the idea that each conscious being affects all other conscious beings. Our behaviour and influence can change the behaviour and influence of others. This can work exponentially. If one particular individual has a wide reaching influence it is possible for their perspective to greatly influence the perspective many others. 

What if the greater consciousness is a democratic system where each conscious being has their own vote. Each individual is constantly reporting back their unique perspective which is assimilated into the greater consciousness. These perspectives are collated and refined to a generic perspective. This generic perspective manifests as reality. Each individual's less than perfect physical senses are reinterpreting that reality and re-reporting back to the system forcing reality into a constant state of flux. The influential individuals I was referring to earlier have the potential to influence so many perspectives that they can transform reality. Individuals like Jesus Christ, Martin Luther King, John Lennon or Adolf Hitler had the ability to cause major changes in perspective and therefore reality. 

What this would mean is we are responsible for each other. Each human responsible for the construction of every other human being. Our beliefs, our behaviours, our influence constantly constructing and re-constructing the fabric of our human being and the reality we perceive. The question is which reality we will choose to construct? 

I hope you enjoyed this foolish thought. There are various links to websites, social media  and content sharing platforms for you to watch, read and listen to various foolish thoughts. 
So don’t forget to subscribe, follow, share, comment or you can help support this foolish work on the provided links to my website or Patreon. 
As Winston Churchill once said 
“The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes.”