The most important person ever

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

Well to be fair, my schedule transforming the world and the future of all mankind via my work keeps me extremely busy. I am confident that my works truly make me the most important person ever, but I don't really care if this is recognized prior to my death. My focus is on service to others, not personal recognition. It simply is the reality that for my works to transform the world the most efficient vehicle is personal branding.

[Augusto]

Is this an emotional response? It sure seems like that, and also I can tell you felt to the temptation of judging me based on a few posts.

My life is pretty sad and my situation very desperate. To be entirely honest, I am contemplating the idea of commiting suicide, so... there is that.

If you're interested in forming a richer view of me as a person, I recommend you to check the thread "Unique, sick or just weird new member" in the psychology zone.

If you are like the other people I've contacted for help, including Joseph E. LeDoux, there is nothing I can do to convince you to listen the voice of reason. I will have to continue my pursue alone. Maybe I will succeed, maybe I will fail. I'm not going to insist after this post, tho, because if I cannot help you "see" the problem right now I know by experience that I will never be able to, no matter what. There won't be hard feelings, tho, but read... let's see if I can help you change your mind:

If I am reading you correctly, right now you are acting at the service of the emotor. This is, your emotions. It is something entirely human, so... what can I suggest to help you overcome such an effective systematization? Well, you would need to take a deep breath and make a conscious effort to evaluate my reasons. Maybe take a paper and write them down yourself. Then you will need to see that it is my "greatness" what you instinctively perceive as a thread to your self image. This perception will drive you to the position of "measuring dicks" with me, which is, you know, not "you".

Now, adding to my previous reasons, I will tell you that by having first hand access to this theory you could further ellaborate in it. You could challenge parts of it if you see something must be challenged, and you would be doing so from the priviledged position of someone who is gaining access to it before anyone else on earth.

By the other hand, we could work as partners in future essays. My thesis is mine, but the brain is big enough for both of us to pursue personal achievements. Several topics in my thesis could be greatly expanded. For instance, the topic of language, which I believe is a big departure from the traditional view.

So, Richard, this are my suggestions, this is my call for help, this is my view on the situation and those are my proposed beneficts to you, as an individual. Please, take into consideration that I am a socially disable person and that I am trying my best to reason with you. I have a 3 years old son and a lovely wife. I am doing this fight also for them. I am not the horrible person you may imagine. I am a man with a very unique situation asking for help.

Would you take your time to analyze my words? Please?

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

Is this an emotional response? It sure seems like that, and also I can tell you felt to the temptation of judging me based on a few posts.

So, Richard, this are my suggestions, this is my call for help, this is my view on the situation and those are my proposed beneficts to you, as an individual. Please, take into consideration that I am a socially disable person and that I am trying my best to reason with you. I have a 3 years old son and a lovely wife. I am doing this fight also for them. I am not the horrible person you may imagine. I am a man with a very unique situation asking for help.

It is not emotional, it is not personal. I am being very honest that what I have to offer the world in my opinion is extremely valuable and in my opinion a better use of my time than working with you to help work on what I consider to be inferior work to my own. I don't think that emotional, I think it a rational choice of where and how I wish to dedicate my time.

I'm not judging you, but I am making the comparison between the work you are offering verses all the other opportunities I have currently to juggle in my life. The same as you have other things going on in life, e.g. a wife, son, emotional and social disabilities, I too have many things going on in life.

We each make our choices in life based on what we feel is the most important. I fully respect your right to believe your work is the most important ever. I respectfully disagree. This does not mean I think your work has no value, just that it is not for me. It doesn't mean I wish you ill will or lack of success. Indeed, I hope you are very successful. The world is a big enough place where we can both be successful and ultimately it will be the people that decide if your work is more important or more valuable than my work. I am good with that.

[Augusto]

Mmm... seriously?

Well, I am surprised. What is it you're working on? I mean, not every day we find people with such high aspirations. If you are really working in something important, I would love to know.

Lol, I did not want to say it but I'll say it eitherway: I found a guy on facebook who freaked out on a hate rampage against me because, you know, I am perceived as a thread, and he started saying that I needed to read Freud and Buddha and that he had read about 5.000 books and all kind of irrational... bullsh... because, well, he felt threatened.

My wife just asked me how this negotiation was doing and I had to tell her, you know, because I cannot imagine you could be telling the truth, unless you're working on a time machine or something like that. Obviously the biggest thing you could be working on is thought, and if I were workig on thought and found someone who was doing the same, specially someone with a finished thesis, claiming to have so many answers, the minimum I would do is to try to get a copy of his work to compare it with my own... so... why are you lying?

I knew there was little to no chance for me to get your help, but at least you made my day with your last post.

Don't forget my name. The name is Carlos Augusto Romero. You can tell your grand children you met me!

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

Mmm... seriously?... so... why are you lying?

I am serious and I have no reason to lie.

It sounds like you believe it only works one direction, that it is impossible for you to believe there are others in the world working on more important endeavors than your own. I remind you, it is your personal perspective.

Just because people do not accept your personal opinion, your perspective as the one and only true way to see the world does not mean they are not serious or that they are lying.

Might I be wrong? Yes. I can accept that my view that what you are working on is not as important as other things I am working on might be wrong. Can you accept that you might be wrong? Can you accept that maybe others are not lying, but simply truly in their heart of hearts believe they are honestly working on endeavors more important than your own?

[Augusto]

Sure I can. As part of my odd nature, I happen to be a very honest and at the same time objective person. I am not afraid of admiting being wrong... but I am not, am I...?

So...

1. Are you working on a time machine or something like that, completely unrelated to thought, emotion and behavior? That would explain your lack of interest in my thesis, for being of no relevance to your work.

2. Are you working on thought, emotion and or behavior? If so, why on earth would you NOT be interested in my work? Maybe you just gave it a 30 secs look to my uncomplese summary and decided it was completely wrong, so there was nothing you could possibly learn from it?

3. Are you simply LYING as a result of your own unsecurities? That would be easier to believe, rather than assuming there are two people on this forum who happen to be involved on game changing projects... right?

So, what is it? I am formally accusing you of being full of "you know" and acting like a "you know" teen based in logic. Are you capable of logically disregard my assumption? Maybe I am missing something?

Look... I have a lot of experience in this kind of reaction. It's been dozens of people that freak out. It seems to be an inevitable result of this conversation. Like this:

- I am the ultimate human being, bigger than Jezus and the Beatles!
- Seriously? Lol...! Why?
- Because this and that.
- Can you back up your claims?
- Sure, here's a brief summary of part of my thesis.
- Wow that's way above my intellectual capabilities, but I will not admit it... mmm... let's drop some sort of negative comment, maybe the binnary argument will work.
- Binary argument destroyed + more arguments to sustain my claim.
- FREAK OUT...!!!
- Dude, you're freaking out. Calm down, listen to reason...
- I'm totally not freaking out. Listen to this poor excuse I just pulled out of my "you know"...!
- Okay.

So... I'm bigger than Jebus and you happen to believe the exact same thing because you happen to be working on something incredibly huge that somehow does not causes you to be interested in my work, not even for comparison purposes. Care to back that up for my amusement?

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

Sure I can. As part of my odd nature, I happen to be a very honest and at the same time objective person. I am not afraid of admiting being wrong... but I am not, am I...?

I don't know if you are wrong, but I do have a brief sample of your work and I have had a few interactions with you now.

In comparison, I have personal connections with many respected researchers across a range of disciplines, but primarily in educational, cognitive and social psychology. I follow and build on the foundational works provided by Albert Bandura, Daniel Khaneman and Gary Klein. For going on 15 years I have attended numerous conferences including AERA, where hundreds of the leading psychologists come together to discuss the latest and greatest research.

I recently helped edit the number one book on motivation in the domain of cognitive psychology on Amazon, authored by Bobby Hoffman. I was in Italy with him when I did that work. He was nice enough to give me a nice mention. We then reconvened in Florida where I helped produce the online course in support of the book, "Motivation for Learning and Performance."

My personal area of expertise is judgment and decision-making. My current focus uses evolutionary psychology and argumentation theory which is now providing some very exciting insights to explain some of the limitations presented by cognitive psychology.

So I take the snap shot of the opportunity you are presenting and then I compare it to the opportunities presented by others. It is a side by side comparison. Where do I feel my time is best spent? Where do I think I can make the biggest impact and transform the world?

Once again, maybe I'm wrong. You might very well be Galileo and like all the others you have encountered I just fail to recognize. It is just my opinion that I have a better path to changing the world than the path you offer. I'm not disparaging your work, in fact I very much encourage you to continue to pursue seeking knowledge and making your contribution.

If you continue to publish, keep in touch with me and who knows, maybe one day I will find an opportunity for you to present your work.

[Augusto]

Oh man, you just kicked my "azz"...!

I got the impression that you were a prominent figure in the forum from the very beginning... mmm... hahaha, I admit defeat. Your response seems legit and reasonable.

Now I don't know if I should beg or drop the issue. If I drop it, I won't get what I want... if I insist (with some dignity) I may have a chance, right? From here, it is pretty obvious what I am going to do.

Well, look... I could tell you a lot about every single area you mentioned. Motivation of learning and performance, judgement and decision.making, evolutionary psychology, and so on. If you don't have anything too important to do, I could just explain you the theory right here, and show you the infinity of implications that can be extracted from those concepts I posted.

Let's say... what I am asking is a letter, a call, something that may not take too much of your time. Let's think of the possibilities:

1. If I am right, then you did the right thing, and I am telling you I can argue my case. So it's not like I am asking you to talk against your convictions. Plus, since this is your speciality, it should be entertaining for you, or so I hope.

2. If I am wrong, you will find that out and hopefully expose your reasons to think that way. This is something I would totally want to know, so I would be grateful. It may be a little bit of your time sort of wasted, but still you spend time over the internet talking to people who need help, so in this scenario it wouldn't be any different.

It would be very possitive for me and my family having a shot, even over this forum. I would really appreciate it, regardless of the result. To tell you the truth, I have had various "freak out" reactions and it feels bad, you know, because I actually need to provide for my loved ones and this work, which I've devoted around five years of my life, is where I have all my hopes.

So, I'm just asking you to give me the chance to keep talking to you on this subject. Do you like novels with psychologists and phylosophy subjects? I have fully translated The Wise, and it is a good novel. It is designed to help the common reader to understand the theory. Would you like me to send you a couple of chapters? It is very good literature, I guarantee it.

Remember, I am making an extraordinary claim. Wouldn't be... logical... to find out if there is some truth behind it?

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

First, I asked to see your work, to post a sample and you did. Based on that sample I gave you feedback, my personal opinion and the next steps you can take to get your work published. If you want to post more samples, feel free.

It is a public space and I'm a regular contributor. I have no issue providing feedback or receiving feedback.

[Augusto]

Two ideas:

1. I share the whole thing with you as it is supposed to be published (this is a novel-essay hybrid) in private. PM, Facebook or e-mail, simply because I cannot leak my whole work over the internet.

2. I start explaining the theory directly on this thread, using the concepts I previously offered you and limiting myself to those concepts, for the sake of keeping a substantial part of it away from public domain.

Aditionally, we could do both, maybe starting with option 2 (forum discussion), and if you find it interesting, I can share more in private.

What do you say Richard?

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

Option 2 (forum discussion) is the time I have available.

[Augusto]

Okay, let's see...

Thought:
It is a system responsible for interpreting information whose main function is ensuring the effective adaptation of the organism to the surrounding environment. Thought operates on subconscious, semi-conscious and conscious levels:
1. Subconscious level: It is the totality of oblivious activities of the mind and is equipped with automatic and instinctive components:
1.1 Instinctive component: It includes everything that happens in the thought that is not determined by will.
1.2 Automatic component: Equivalent to all the elements, principles and systematizations that enable the act of thinking.
2. Semiconscious level: It is characterized by the ability to handle all the psychic matter directly. The work of the semiconscious can be understood according to the nature of its performance with respect to conscious performance and it can be assumed or agreed:
2.1 Assumed performance: Occurs when the semiconscious plays a major role in making decisions, whether it makes use of the automatic component; generally aimed at producing quick answers; or when it interferes with the active lines of thought through dissociated representations.
2.2 Agreed performance: It is when the semiconscious works according to certain objectives determined at the conscious level, whether through managing the automatic component of the subconscious or through the manipulation of psychic matter oriented to the use of its reflective or creative capacity, or for data recovery.
3. Conscious level: It refers to the conditioned freedom of thought granted by emotions through the principle of fixation, phenomenon from which language and lexicon emerge:
3.1 Language: Equals to the handling of representations for building lines of thought of varying complexity and in some species is linked to the ability of using a lexicon.
3.2 Lexicon: It involves the use of a code capable of increasing the intelligibility of lines of thought and of facilitating communication with external agents who are participants of the same code.

Thought is all about interpretation and adapting. This may be reduced to receiving an input and giving the propper response, something we can see in very primitive organisms like corals.

Thought is like 3 different (yet related) softwares that work together. Those are the levels, from the most primitive to the intermediate to the more complex one.

1. Subconscious level is everything that is irreflexive, automatic or instinctive.

2. Semiconscious level on asumed performance is what you see on butterflies, for example, when they go against a light bulb like forever.

3. Conscious level is like a c**karoach, who can clearly think more efficiently than butterflies.

We, humans, have all this three levels of thinking working together.

Notice that this conclusion is something that I found as I progressed in my tesis, rather than a starting point, that we actually kept our primitive brain functions rather than changing them for a better or more evolved one.

Evolution consisted on added pieces rather than in the transformation of our brain into something entirely different.

What do you think so far?

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

Thought is all about interpretation and adapting. This may be reduced to receiving an input and giving the propper response, something we can see in very primitive organisms like corals.

Thought is like 3 different (yet related) softwares that work together. Those are the levels, from the most primitive to the intermediate to the more complex one.

1. Subconscious level is everything that is irreflexive, automatic or instinctive.

2. Semiconscious level on asumed performance is what you see on butterflies, for example, when they go against a light bulb like forever.

3. Conscious level is like a c**karoach, who can clearly think more efficiently than butterflies.

We, humans, have all this three levels of thinking working together.

Notice that this conclusion is something that I found as I progressed in my tesis, rather than a starting point, that we actually kept our primitive brain functions rather than changing them for a better or more evolved one.

Evolution consisted on added pieces rather than in the transformation of our brain into something entirely different.

What do you think so far?

It is roughly the equivalent of Daniel Khaneman's theory of the 2 system mind, system 1 is the rough equivalent of your #2 and system 2 is the rough equivalent of your #3. As it relates to the concept of thought, researchers skip over discussing automated systems like breathing, heart beating, blinking, etc.

It is also similar to the "reptilian brain" theory.

[Augusto]

That's a good thing, I believe, but let me put it in perspective, just in case...

We are in the 21 century right now, and I don't think it would be easy to calculate the ammount of books that have been published regarding thought. A lot of people have said a lot of different things and it's only logical that you are going to find similarities between my work and other people's works. After all, psychology does exist, and it's not like astrology, right?

With that being said, my theory stands out in two specyphic ways:

1. It is a unified theory that basically explains everything related to thought, emotion and (normal) behavior, which actually goes further, as it can be seen in animals and even societies (which is obvious if we understand that societies are human constructions) indiferently of their time in history.

2. It is a functional theory, which means that once you get it, you will be able to see the machine "moving". It offers results in all kinds of areas and it is predictive. The way I see it, it's sort of like a mathematical formula written with words.

---

So, to progress in the explanation, I would need to tell you that everything in the brain is interconected systems, little and primitive systematizations reacting to stimuli. Consciousness is pretty much an empty word when you look at the particular details of what really happens in the brain.

This is particularly true when you look at (my explanation of) language. However, before moving forward, I would like to know if you have any questions, as I want you to really understand what I am saying before challenging it.

Questions would be great...!

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

I agree it is to be expected that over a 5 year period you will be pulling from a variety of books/resources and there will be similarities.

I only have one question at this point. You claim the theory is predictive (functional). This means from the theory a testable hypothesis can be stated. What is one hypothesis/prediction you are looking to disprove/prove?