Democracy's First Danger – Mediocrity

Home Forums Urantia Book General Discussions Democracy's First Danger – Mediocrity

Tagged: 

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 69 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #35987
    André
    André
    Participant

    Hi,

    39:5.7 Suspicion is the inherent (innate,inborn) reaction of primitive men.

    Suspicion (ignorance breeds suspicion).

    How could it be otherwise?

    Suspicion/mistrust/uncertainty/mediocrity … all descends from m.o.b.

    Jesus, our Father never put emphases on error.

    When confronted to it, he shed light in it. He referred to it (m.o.b.) as light of those primitives ages.

    Can I set myself free from it? Can you?

    #35988
    André
    André
    Participant

    Hihihi …

    What a uncamaraderie situation between 2 loved fellowship !!!

    I do know and beleived such circumstances is temporary and will resolved as soon you involved and search Father’s with the aim of

    reaching the fairest outcome. We are full-time religionist.

    It couldn’t be spared such argumentation when exercising individual point of view.    63:4.9

    Ends and means do not belong to separate realm.

    For sure, count me in concerning our camaraderie.

    With brotherly affection to Bonita and Bradly or ;-)   vice-versa.

    André

    #35989
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant

    Maybe mediocrity is only a symptom, an effect of shallow choosing and lazy thinking. The root of the mediocre must be somewhere in human frailty. An animal can’t be or do anything mediocre, can it? Neither can it do anything majorocre (that should be a word)?

    You are what you think, right?  Shallow lazy thinking results in a shallow, lazy and mediocre character.  If educators reward shallow, lazy thinking their students will perform mediocrely and  these students make up the electorate.  Some will eventually be elected as leaders of their democracy even further inculcating shallow, lazy thinking.

    I think this quote describes mediocrity pretty well.  Shallow, lazy thinking blames (and shames) others. It sounds like an indictment against socialism to me, which is why TUB says democracy is the ideal. What should a democracy do for these people?  Or should they do something for the democracy?

    70:9.16 The weak and the inferior have always contended for equal rights; they have always insisted that the state compel the strong and superior to supply their wants and otherwise make good those deficiencies which all too often are the natural result of their own indifference and indolence.

     

    #35990
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant

    With brotherly affection to Bonita and Bradly or   vice-versa.

    Thank you André.  Brotherly affection to you as well.  Thanks for being here.

    #35991
    Bradly
    Bradly
    Participant

    What conditions might support the diminuition of the pursuit of excellence and aspirational ideals?

    Secularism, atheism, solipsism, selfish love, come first to mind… It’s hard not to equate/associate mediocrity with error/evil if not sin. It’s glorification involves going against the will of divinity. But is mediocrity’s glorification a conscious choice? Can we unchoose it? Maybe mediocrity is only a symptom, an effect of shallow choosing and lazy thinking. The root of the mediocre must be somewhere in human frailty. An animal can’t be or do anything mediocre, can it? Neither can it do anything majorocre (that should be a word)?

    .I don’t think ambition, intelligence, creativity, insight, and inventiveness are limited to the religious and withheld from the secular/scientific/material pursuits of humanity or the individual.  Are the unreligious or less religious mediocre?  Hmmm…

    IMO, in my country (USA) the church going congregationalists and pulpiteers the past 3 decades have been the greatest danger to our democracy perhaps in its entire history…the moral majority is neither.  Odd.  Indeed, did religionists deliver democracy to our world?  And how much scientific, material, economic, and other forms of secular progress has come despite the religious leaders and masses?  And what of those who murdered Jesus?  Weren’t they religious?  This issue is more complicated I think.

    Religionists do not necessarily pursue excellence and secularists do not automatically pursue mediocrity.  Blaming mediocrity on secularism or political trends or parties or platforms we disagree with misses the point altogether I think.  I wonder if mediocrity isn’t merely a reflection of general comfort with the status quo?  Or the fear of losing that status quo?  Psychologically, the fear of loss is  a greater influence on choice and behavior than the hope of gain and so keeping what one has from loss is more a motivation than the ambition and hope of gaining more.  Only those with courage, or nothing to lose (the desperate), are willing or eager to take chances that may threaten the status quo.

    Remember, it is not mediocrity but its glorification that is the danger to democracy.  I think complacency and indolence and laziness and comfort with the status quo and the fear of its loss leads to the “glorification” of the status quo which leads to mediocrity.

    132:3.3 Man tends to crystallize science, formulate philosophy, and dogmatize truth because he is mentally lazy in adjusting to the progressive struggles of living, while he is also terribly afraid of the unknown. Natural man is slow to initiate changes in his habits of thinking and in his techniques of living.

     

    #35992
    Avatar
    Mark Kurtz
    Participant

    Question: Is popularism related to mediocrity? Cannot high thinkers be part of the popular movement?

    #35993
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant

    Question: Is popularism related to mediocrity? Cannot high thinkers be part of the popular movement?

    Do you mean populism or popularism?

    #35994
    Avatar
    Mark Kurtz
    Participant

    Well, I spelled it wrong. It should be populism.

    Sorry.

     

    #35995
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant

    Well, I spelled it wrong. It should be populism. Sorry.

    No, actually you’re right.  They are two different things.  From WikiDiff:

    As nouns the difference between popularism and populism is that popularism is any political doctrine chosen to appeal to a majority of the electorate while populism is (philosophy) a political doctrine or philosophy that proposes that the rights and powers of ordinary people are exploited by a privileged elite, and supports their struggle to overcome this.

    I think, but am not certain, that popularism has to do with public opinion and  popular opinion is 5th on the list of the dangers of democracy.

    71:2.6 5. Slavery to public opinion; the majority is not always right.

    71:2.7 Public opinion, common opinion, has always delayed society; nevertheless, it is valuable, for, while retarding social evolution, it does preserve civilization. Education of public opinion is the only safe and true method of accelerating civilization; force is only a temporary expedient, and cultural growth will increasingly accelerate as bullets give way to ballots. Public opinion, the mores, is the basic and elemental energy in social evolution and state development, but to be of state value it must be nonviolent in expression.

    When it comes to populism I think it boils down to who is considered to be the “privileged elite”.  Some think the top economic 1% and Wall Street are the privileged elite while others think the “deep state” and socialistic academia are the privileged elite.  It’s all a matter of perspective.

    But more specifically to your question, high thinkers can definitely be mediocre.  I know a few.  Even TUB laments that so many great intellects are stuck in cultural bondage.

     

     

    #35996
    Richard E Warren
    Richard E Warren
    Participant

    What conditions might support the diminuition of the pursuit of excellence and aspirational ideals?

    Secularism, atheism, solipsism, selfish love, come first to mind… It’s hard not to equate/associate mediocrity with error/evil if not sin. It’s glorification involves going against the will of divinity. But is mediocrity’s glorification a conscious choice? Can we unchoose it? Maybe mediocrity is only a symptom, an effect of shallow choosing and lazy thinking. The root of the mediocre must be somewhere in human frailty. An animal can’t be or do anything mediocre, can it? Neither can it do anything majorocre (that should be a word)?

    .I don’t think ambition, intelligence, creativity, insight, and inventiveness are limited to the religious and withheld from the secular/scientific/material pursuits of humanity or the individual. Are the unreligious or less religious mediocre? Hmmm… IMO, in my country (USA) the church going congregationalists and pulpiteers the past 3 decades have been the greatest danger to our democracy perhaps in its entire history…the moral majority is neither. Odd. Indeed, did religionists deliver democracy to our world? And how much scientific, material, economic, and other forms of secular progress has come despite the religious leaders and masses? And what of those who murdered Jesus? Weren’t they religious? This issue is more complicated I think. Religionists do not necessarily pursue excellence and secularists do not automatically pursue mediocrity. Blaming mediocrity on secularism or political trends or parties or platforms we disagree with misses the point altogether I think. I wonder if mediocrity isn’t merely a reflection of general comfort with the status quo? Or the fear of losing that status quo? Psychologically, the fear of loss is a greater influence on choice and behavior than the hope of gain and so keeping what one has from loss is more a motivation than the ambition and hope of gaining more. Only those with courage, or nothing to lose (the desperate), are willing or eager to take chances that may threaten the status quo. Remember, it is not mediocrity but its glorification that is the danger to democracy. I think complacency and indolence and laziness and comfort with the status quo and the fear of its loss leads to the “glorification” of the status quo which leads to mediocrity. 132:3.3 Man tends to crystallize science, formulate philosophy, and dogmatize truth because he is mentally lazy in adjusting to the progressive struggles of living, while he is also terribly afraid of the unknown. Natural man is slow to initiate changes in his habits of thinking and in his techniques of living.

    Many worthy thoughts and questions, Bradly. Agreed: Mixing Christianity and politics has to contribute to the most profound level of the mediocritization of Jesus and his message.

    As for mediocrity’s origin, we appear to agree it’s roots go back to the animal propensity for the elimination of want, and nothing else. Mediocrity’s antithesis seems to be spirit, robust (thank you Mark) spirit.

    And yes, it’s a good thing not to demonize mediocrity, as you infer, it’s glorification is the problem. Mediocrity is, apparently, a known and accepted step in evolution. But Urantia tripped and fell.

    .

    Richard E Warren

    #35997
    Richard E Warren
    Richard E Warren
    Participant

    What conditions might support the diminuition of the pursuit of excellence and aspirational ideals?

    Secularism, atheism, solipsism, selfish love, come first to mind… It’s hard not to equate/associate mediocrity with error/evil if not sin. It’s glorification involves going against the will of divinity. But is mediocrity’s glorification a conscious choice? Can we unchoose it? Maybe mediocrity is only a symptom, an effect of shallow choosing and lazy thinking. The root of the mediocre must be somewhere in human frailty. An animal can’t be or do anything mediocre, can it? Neither can it do anything majorocre (that should be a word)?

    .I don’t think ambition, intelligence, creativity, insight, and inventiveness are limited to the religious and withheld from the secular/scientific/material pursuits of humanity or the individual. Are the unreligious or less religious mediocre? Hmmm… IMO, in my country (USA) the church going congregationalists and pulpiteers the past 3 decades have been the greatest danger to our democracy perhaps in its entire history…the moral majority is neither. Odd. Indeed, did religionists deliver democracy to our world? And how much scientific, material, economic, and other forms of secular progress has come despite the religious leaders and masses? And what of those who murdered Jesus? Weren’t they religious? This issue is more complicated I think. Religionists do not necessarily pursue excellence and secularists do not automatically pursue mediocrity. Blaming mediocrity on secularism or political trends or parties or platforms we disagree with misses the point altogether I think. I wonder if mediocrity isn’t merely a reflection of general comfort with the status quo? Or the fear of losing that status quo? Psychologically, the fear of loss is a greater influence on choice and behavior than the hope of gain and so keeping what one has from loss is more a motivation than the ambition and hope of gaining more. Only those with courage, or nothing to lose (the desperate), are willing or eager to take chances that may threaten the status quo. Remember, it is not mediocrity but its glorification that is the danger to democracy. I think complacency and indolence and laziness and comfort with the status quo and the fear of its loss leads to the “glorification” of the status quo which leads to mediocrity. 132:3.3 Man tends to crystallize science, formulate philosophy, and dogmatize truth because he is mentally lazy in adjusting to the progressive struggles of living, while he is also terribly afraid of the unknown. Natural man is slow to initiate changes in his habits of thinking and in his techniques of living.

    Many worthy thoughts and questions, Bradly. Agreed: Mixing Christianity and politics has to contribute to the most profound level of the mediocritization of Jesus and his message.

    As for mediocrity’s origin, we appear to agree it’s roots go back to the animal propensity for the elimination of want, and nothing else. Mediocrity’s antithesis seems to be spirit, robust (thank you Mark) spirit.

    And yes, it’s a good thing not to demonize mediocrity, as you infer, it’s glorification is the problem. Mediocrity is, apparently, a known and accepted step in evolution. But Urantia tripped and fell. Somebody put bubble gum on it. ;-)

    .

    Richard E Warren

    #35998
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant

    Mediocrity is, apparently, a known and accepted step in evolution.

    How so?

    #35999
    Richard E Warren
    Richard E Warren
    Participant

    Mediocrity is, apparently, a known and accepted step in evolution.

    How so?

    So maybe you’re thinking evolutionary worlds, and all democratic systems, don’t pass thru, or at least experience the consequences of, a mediocre phase? Seems inevitable. How not?

    .

    Richard E Warren

    #36000
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant

    So maybe you’re thinking evolutionary worlds, and all democratic systems, don’t pass thru, or at least experience the consequences of, a mediocre phase?

    I was asking for specifics since your statement was rather broad. You said that mediocrity is a known and accepted step in evolution.  Evolution of what? Is there evidence that mediocrity a necessary step of evolution?  What exactly do you mean?  I don’t want to be like some who jump to conclusions as to meaning without clarifying first.

    #36001
    Richard E Warren
    Richard E Warren
    Participant

    I was asking for specifics since your statement was rather broad.

    It was.

    You said that mediocrity is a known and accepted step in evolution. Evolution of what?

    Civilizations.

    Is there evidence that mediocrity a necessary step of evolution?

    Well, when it is equated with evil/error. The two go hand in hand and are a distinction without a difference, no?

    What exactly do you mean? I don’t want to be like some who jump to conclusions as to meaning without clarifying first.

    That’s fair. I shouldn’t have made the assertion without qualification and clarification. Is it now clear?

    .

    Richard E Warren

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 69 total)

Login to reply to this topic.

Not registered? Sign up here.