Doctrine: The Father Of A Thousand Bastard Children

Doctrine: the Father of a thousand bastard children. Doctrine, like Proteas, has a thousand faces, most so skilfully woven into the fabric of society as to be invisible to human understanding. Common sense, defined by Einstein as a collection of prejudices collected by age eighteen, would seem to be the eldest child, and the most used form of doctrinal exchange, a routine whereby we agree or are forced to accept someone else’s doctrine. In order to understand Doctrine one must first analysis the word carefully, its brother, indoctrinate would be more familiar to the average person. Doctrine (Latin: doctrina) is a codification of beliefs or "a body of teachings" or "instructions", taught principles or positions, as the body of teachings in a branch of knowledge or a belief system. Often doctrine specifically connotes a corpus of religious dogma as it is promulgated by a church, but not necessarily: doctrine is also used to refer to a principle of law, in the common law traditions, established through a history of past decisions, such as the doctrine of self-defense, or the principle of fair use. History has produced many doctrines, which can today be named, analyzed, and discussed, such as the early Hellenistic doctrines or the Roman doctrines of law.  Some of these doctrines lived for years, some for months, most existed or can be deduced from early writings, but in all, the great common dominator of doctrine, the greatest testing tool, if you will, is that doctrine only exists in the mind of man. Remove man from the planet and all doctrine cease to exist. However, it is the institutions, the army, schools, jails, universities, that we find the greatest proliferation of doctrine, those both written and unwritten.  The educational institution without a doubt gives birth to the greatest number of deformed doctrinal children, merely because it, as an institution, is the most pervasive of all systems devised by man to destroy knowledge and breed a race of inept, codified non-thinkers.  The difference, the proverbial thin red line, between Doctrines brother, indoctrinate, is so narrow, so misaligned, so blurred, as to be almost invisible.  In education one is asked to stand as much as possible outside the body of carefully accumulated, preprogrammed, dished up concocted knowledge and analyze it for oneself. In indoctrination, on the other hand, one stands within this body of knowledge and absorbs its teachings without critical thought, in other word, a mindless automaton. The human mind, the child’s mind become a photocopy machine, reproducing knowledge, from unconfirmed sources,  unknown authors, questionable educators and past events which have very little, or any, real significance in today’s world. Faith, myth, superstition, belief, are all children, some of course are dressed in the finest clothes, have the greatest principals and adherents, one could imagine; nevertheless, they are all doctrines, by another name. Principals once defined as something one writes on tombstones, i.e. “he was a man of fine principals” is nothing but shadow doctrinal adherence, in other words, if your principals agree with my principals you are a good guy, if your faith, myth, superstition, belief, religion, sexual orientation, etc. etc., ad nauseum,  agrees with mine, you are a good guy. All these bastard children, obsessed with their rectitude, are the creators of the pattern of thought in our children, the precursors of the new world, the evil shapers of their worldview. Of all the children of doctrine, the most evil, is discipline, the forced adherence to our way. The word discipline comes from the word disciple, which means “to follow”, the word discipline was invented by the early Church schools, because the words like thrash, beat and whip, developed bad connotations.  How long will it take mankind to realize that thrashing a child destroys individual incentive, that forcing people, with whips, with a gun or bombs or with destruction, produces nothing but hate and fear for you and the doctrine you are forcing down my throat. Is this really something we want our children “to follow”? It is necessary to admit (concede) that ipso facto, doctrine has to assume the superiority of OUR way to YOUR way.  This directly implies that all doctrine is oppositional and conflict-directed as a matter of competitive imperative.  The definition, whether overtly or covertly, of mutually exclusive or inclusive areas of interest, (language, race, creed, religion, birth right, etc.) and the declaration of zero-sum endgames (you will die, go to hell) is the very meat upon which all doctrine feeds.  Co-operation and synergy, of the masses, whether ‘forced’ (by law) or ‘voluntary’ (by indoctrination), or ‘involuntary’ (by mass hysteria) are inimical to the correct application of doctrine within our ‘so called’ free society.  At every level, doctrine is the setting for conflict: there can be no dominance by OUR way if YOUR way is allowed to flourish. Conceit the ugly sister of doctrine, finds the most fertile soil in the minds of the religionist, who in order to sell his wares has to convince his followers that they are the most superior, chosen beings on earth, who by some supernatural power, some divine source and, of course, total adherence to ‘our way’ will bring you something, or somewhere, which he cannot even prove exists.

Name*:
E-mail*:
Captcha*:
Text*: