Quote:

Ovanstående är väll ett modeord om något. Reptiler, Religioner, Propaganda, defensiv personlig psykologi osv. Lista gärna på alla typer 'chimärer' ni kan hitta på....

fysiska livet(?) Hähä

Onekligen, hehe! :)

Chimär kommer från grekiska mytologin;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_%28mythology%29

Vilket "råkar" vara en drake/orm, plus lejon och get och har lite med det fördolda att göra;

"The term chimera has also come to mean hard to believe or difficult to understand."

Vem vet vem som har feltolkat egentligen när nästan alla våra nuvarande ord har bytt mening från vad de ursprungligen innebar?

Ord som 'rationalist' exempelvis, innebär i folkmun idag en person som är strikt materialistiskt logisk, skeptisk mot det intangibla och övertygad om att den moderna vetenskapen har svar på allt.
Ursprungligen betydde rationalist en person som trodde på ofelbara rättesnören i logik och moral som var gudomligt givna i en människas inre, Sokrates var rationalist som exempel.

"Sokrates tillbringade tiden på gatorna med att diskutera och ifrågasätta andra människors kunskap. I första hand diskuterade Sokrates med ungdomar, och genom dessa diskussioner ville han få dem att inse deras okunnighet. Han bevisade att de egentligen inte visste någonting, som de själva ansåg sig veta. Genom utfrågningar ledde han dem, att komma fram till den enda sanningen. Med det ville han få dem att inse, att kunskap bygger på att man själv kan fundera ut svaret. Han ställde frågor som ledde dem “rätt”. Sokrates ansåg att varje människa kan komma till sann och allmängiltig kunskap, genom att (som Gunnar Aspelin skriver i “filosofiens historia”) “tänka genom problemen utan att förvillas av oklara fraser och bestickande halvsanningar”. Han var rationalist och ansåg att kunskapen fanns i själen, den behövde bara “födas” fram. Sokrates jämförde sig själv med en barnmorska som förlossade nya tankar och hans metod har kallats maieutik, av såväl honom själv som av andra. I till exempel dialogen Menon visar Sokrates hur man genom att ställa de rätta frågorna, kan få Menons slavgosse att bevisa ett geometriskt bevis. Trots att slavgossen aldrig hade hört talas om beviset förut."

Citat från: http://skolarbete.nu/skolarbeten/sokrates/

Vad brukar människor kallas idag som tror att all kunskap finns i själen och kan "födas" fram?

Sry där för offtopic men det var för att belysa något jag tyckte var analogiskt.

Hmm.. ja det är lite analogt med mig som person iaf. Jag har i dagarna gått i tankarna om att göra en intellektuell jämförelse mellan Rationalisering och Resonemang.

Inom psykologin så kallas Rationalisering för en 'neurotisk' skyddsmekanism:

Rationalization: Where a person convinces him or herself that no wrong was done and that all is or was all right through faulty and false reasoning. An indicator of this defence mechanism can be seen socially as the formulation of convenient excuses - "making excuses".

Jag tycker det håller på många plan, speciellt i ovanstående pragmatiska beskrivning. När man tar till tanken om att analysera 'resonemangsmetodik' så kommer man ju in på väldigt många saker som är, för en vanligt skolad människa, helt främmande för att det inte kommer genom den 'standard' av skolgång vi har och att ens uppfattningsförmåga är begränsad av inte nog med dom skyddsmekanismer jag tjatar om utan även systematiserade saker som Propaganda, diverse falskheter osv. Här kommer en radda med länkar som kan va intressant för att förstå olika typer av resonemangkategorier och hinder:

Cognitive bias
A cognitive bias is a person's tendency to make errors in judgment based on cognitive factors, and is a phenomenon studied in cognitive science and social psychology. Forms of cognitive bias include errors in statistical judgment, social attribution, and memory that are common to all human beings. Such biases drastically skew the reliability of anecdotal and legal evidence. These are thought to be based upon heuristics, or rules of thumb, which people employ out of habit or evolutionary necessity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias

Cognitive dissonance
Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing them.[2] It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

PsyOps
Psychological warfare (PSYWAR), or the basic aspects of modern psychological operations (PSYOP), have been known by many other names or terms, including Psy Ops, Political Warfare, “Hearts and Minds,” and even Propaganda.[1] Various techniques are used, by any set of groups, and aimed to influence a target audience's value systems, belief systems, emotions, motives, reasoning, or behavior. It is used to induce confessions or reinforce attitudes and behaviors favorable to the originator's objectives, and are sometimes combined with black operations or false flag tactics. Target audiences can be governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.

The U.S. Department of Defense defines psychological warfare as:

"The planned use of propaganda and other psychological actions having the primary purpose of influencing the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of hostile foreign groups in such a way as to support the achievement of national objectives."[1]

During World War II the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff defined psychological warfare more broadly stating "Psychological warfare employs any weapon to influence the mind of the enemy. The weapons are psychological only in the effect they produce and not because of the weapons themselves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PsyOps

Defense Mechanisms
In Freudian psychoanalytic theory, defence mechanisms or defense mechanisms (see -ce/-se) are unconscious[1] psychological strategies brought into play by various entities to cope with reality and to maintain self-image. Healthy persons normally use different defences throughout life. An ego defence mechanism becomes pathological only when its persistent use leads to maladaptive behavior such that the physical and/or mental health of the individual is adversely affected. The purpose of the Ego Defence Mechanisms is to protect the mind/self/ego from anxiety, social sanctions or to provide a refuge from a situation with which one cannot currently cope.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_mechanisms

Ad hominem
A Latin phrase which has come to mean attacking your opponent, as opposed to attacking their arguments.

Ad nauseam
This argument approach uses tireless repetition of an idea. An idea, especially a simple slogan, that is repeated enough times, may begin to be taken as the truth. This approach works best when media sources
are limited and controlled by the propagator.

Appeal to authority
Appeals to authority cite prominent figures to support a position, idea, argument, or course of action.

Appeal to fear
Appeals to fear seek to build support by instilling anxieties and panic in the general population, for example, Joseph Goebbels exploited Theodore Kaufman’s Germany Must Perish! to claim that the
Allies sought the extermination of the German people.

Appeal to prejudice
Using loaded or emotive terms to attach value or moral goodness to believing the proposition. For example, the phrase: “Any hard-working taxpayer would have to agree that those who do not work, and who do not support the community do not deserve the community’s support
through social assistance.”

Bandwagon
Bandwagon and “inevitable-victory” appeals attempt to persuade the target audience to join in and take the course of action that “everyone else is taking.”

Inevitable victory: invites those not already on the bandwagon to join those already on the road to certain victory. Those already or at least partially on the bandwagon are reassured that staying aboard is
their best course of action.

Join the crowd: This technique reinforces people’s natural desire to be on the winning side. This technique is used to convince the audience that a program is an expression of an irresistible mass movement and that it is in their best interest to join.

Black-and-White fallacy
Presenting only two choices, with the product or idea being propagated as the better choice. (e.g., “You are either with us, or you are with the enemy”)

Beautiful people
The type of propaganda that deals with famous people or depicts attractive, happy people. This makes other people think that if they buy a product or follow a certain ideology, they too will be happy or successful. (This is more used in advertising for products, instead of political reasons)

Big Lie
The repeated articulation of a complex of events that justify subsequent action. The descriptions of these events have elements of truth, and the “big lie” generalizations merge and eventually supplant the public’s accurate perception of the underlying events. After World War I the German Stab in the back explanation of the cause of their defeat became a justification for Nazi re-militarization and revanchist aggression.

Common man
The “‘plain folks’” or “common man” approach attempts to convince the audience that the propagandist’s positions reflect the common sense of the people. It is designed to win the confidence of the audience by communicating in the common manner and style of the target audience. Propagandists use ordinary language and mannerisms (and clothe their message in face-to-face and audiovisual communications) in attempting to identify their point of view with that of the average person. For
example, a propaganda leaflet may make an argument on a macroeconomic issue, such as unemployment insurance benefits, using everyday terms: “given that the country has little money during this recession, we should stop paying unemployment benefits to those who do not work, because that is like maxing out all your credit cards during a tight period, when you should be tightening your belt.”

Demonizing the enemy
Making individuals from the opposing nation, from a different ethnic group, or those who support the opposing viewpoint appear to be subhuman (e.g., the Vietnam War-era term “gooks” for National Front for the Liberation of South Vietnam aka Vietcong, (or ‘VC’) soldiers), worthless, or immoral, through suggestion or false accusations. World War I poster by Winsor McCay, urging Americans to buy Liberty Bonds

Direct order
This technique hopes to simplify the decision making process by using images and words to tell the audience exactly what actions to take, eliminating any other possible choices. Authority figures can be used to give the order, overlapping it with the Appeal to authority technique, but not necessarily. The Uncle Sam “I want you” image is an example of this technique.

Euphoria
The use of an event that generates euphoria or happiness, or using an appealing event to boost morale. Euphoria can be created by declaring a holiday, making luxury items available, or mounting a military parade with marching bands and patriotic messages.

Disinformation
The creation or deletion of information from public records, in the purpose of making a false record of an event or the actions of a person or organization, including outright forgery of photographs, motion pictures, broadcasts, and sound recordings as well as printed documents.

Flag-waving
An attempt to justify an action on the grounds that doing so will make one more patriotic, or in some way benefit a group, country, or idea. The feeling of patriotism which this technique attempts to inspire may not necessarily diminish or entirely omit one’s capability for rational examination of the matter in question. The Finnish Maiden – personification of Finnish nationalism

Glittering generalities
Glittering generalities are emotionally appealing words applied to a product or idea, but which present no concrete argument or analysis. A famous example is the campaign slogan “Ford has a better idea!”

Half-truth
A half-truth is a deceptive statement which may come in several forms and includes some element of truth. The statement might be partly true, the statement may be totally true but only part of the whole truth, or it may utilize some deceptive element, such as improper punctuation, or double meaning, especially if the intent is to deceive, evade blame or misrepresent the truth.

Intentional vagueness
Generalities are deliberately vague so that the audience may supply its own interpretations. The intention is to move the audience by use of undefined phrases, without analyzing their validity or attempting to determine their reasonableness or application. The intent is to cause people to draw their own interpretations rather than simply being presented with an explicit idea. In trying to “figure out” the propaganda, the audience forgoes judgment of the ideas presented. Their validity, reasonableness and application may still be considered.

Obtain disapproval or Reductio ad Hitlerum
This technique is used to persuade a target audience to disapprove of an action or idea by suggesting that the idea is popular with groups hated, feared, or held in contempt by the target audience. Thus if a group which supports a certain policy is led to believe that undesirable, subversive, or contemptible people support the same policy, then the members of the group may decide to change their original position. This is a form of bad logic, where a is said to equal X, and b is said to equal X, therefore, a = b.

Oversimplification
Favorable generalities are used to provide simple answers to complex social, political, economic, or military problems.

Quotes out of Context
Selective editing of quotes which can change meanings. Political documentaries designed to discredit an opponent or an opposing political viewpoint often make use of this technique.

Name-calling
Propagandists use the name-calling technique to incite fears and arouse prejudices in their hearers in the intent that the bad names will cause hearers to construct a negative opinion about a group or set of beliefs or ideas that the propagandist would wish hearers to denounce. The method is intended to provoke conclusions about a matter apart from impartial examinations of facts. Name-calling is thus a substitute for rational, fact-based arguments against the an idea or
belief on its own merits.[1]

Rationalization
Individuals or groups may use favorable generalities to rationalize questionable acts or beliefs. Vague and pleasant phrases are often used to justify such actions or beliefs.

Red herring
Presenting data or issues that, while compelling, are irrelevant to the argument at hand, and then claiming that it validates the argument.

Labeling
A Euphemism is used when the propagandist attempts to increase the perceived quality, credibility, or credence of a particular ideal. A Dysphemism is used when the intent of the propagandist is to discredit, diminish the perceived quality, or hurt the perceived righteousness of the Mark. By creating a ‘label’ or ‘category’ or ‘faction’ of a population, it is much easier to make an example of these larger bodies, because they can uplift or defame the Mark without actually incurring legal-defamation. Example: “Liberal” is a dysphamsim intended to diminish the perceived credibility of a particular Mark. By taking a displeasing argument presented by a Mark, the propagandist can quote that person, and then attack ‘liberals’ in an attempt to both (1) create a political battle-ax of unaccountable aggression and (2) diminish the quality of the Mark. If the propagandist uses the label on too-many perceivably credible individuals, muddying up the word can be done by broadcasting bad-examples of ‘liberals’ into the media. Labeling can be thought of as a sub-set of Guilt by association, another Logical Fallacy.

Repetition
This type of propaganda deals with a jingle or word that is repeated over and over again, thus getting it stuck in someones head, so they can buy the product. The “Repetition” method has been described previously.

Slogans
A slogan is a brief, striking phrase that may include labeling and stereotyping. Although slogans may be enlisted to support reasoned ideas, in practice they tend to act only as emotional appeals. Opponents of the US’s invasion and occupation of Iraq use the slogan “blood for oil” to suggest that the invasion and its human losses was done to access Iraq’s oil riches. On the other hand, “hawks” who argue that the US should continue to fight in Iraq use the slogan “cut and run” to suggest that it would be cowardly or weak to withdraw from Iraq. Similarly, the names of the military campaigns, such as “enduring freedom” or “just cause”, may also be regarded to be slogans, devised to influence people.

Stereotyping or Name Calling or Labeling
This technique attempts to arouse prejudices in an audience by labeling the object of the propaganda campaign as something the target audience fears, hates, loathes, or finds undesirable. For instance, reporting on a foreign country or social group may focus on the stereotypical traits that the reader expects, even though they are far from being representative of the whole country or group; such reporting often focuses on the anecdotal.

Testimonial
Testimonials are quotations, in or out of context, especially cited to support or reject a given policy, action, program, or personality. The reputation or the role (expert, respected public figure, etc.) of the individual giving the statement is exploited. The testimonial places the official sanction of a respected person or authority on a propaganda message. This is done in an effort to cause the target audience to identify itself with the authority or to accept the authority’s opinions and beliefs as its own. See also, damaging quotation

Transfer
Also known as Association, this is a technique of projecting positive or negative qualities (praise or blame) of a person, entity, object, or value (an individual, group, organization, nation, patriotism, etc.) to another to make the second more acceptable or to discredit it. It evokes an emotional response, which stimulates the target to identify with recognized authorities. Often highly visual, this technique often utilizes symbols (for example, the Swastika used in Nazi Germany, originally a symbol for health and prosperity) superimposed over other visual images. An example of common use of
this technique in America is for the President’s image to be overlaid with a swastika by his opponents.

Unstated assumption
This technique is used when the propaganda concept that the propagandist intends to transmit would seem less credible if
explicitly stated. The concept is instead repeatedly assumed or implied.

Virtue words
These are words in the value system of the target audience which tend to produce a positive image when attached to a person or issue. Peace, happiness, security, wise leadership, freedom, “The Truth”, etc. are virtue words. In countries such as the U.S. religiosity is seen as a virtue, making associations to this quality affectively beneficial.
http://www.freethoughtsociety.org/?q=node/1752

Ursäkta längden på inlägget, det är nog rekord.

Kopierade hela och läser senare, bra med stoff där till att skriva ungefär 10 deckare om propagandaagenter, mörka operationer och hjärntvätt. ^^
Ser dessutom att många av de här teknikerna ovan överlappar varandra.

Men omformulerat från hur jag skrev i en annan tråd:
Varför är det så obehagligt för ideologiskt övertygade människor att se verkligheten bara för vad den är utan "cognitive bias" eller vad vakna ibland kallar skygglappar?
Vad är det som skräms?

Skam! Egots skyddsmekanismer. Det gör psykiskt ont och ha fel. Det är primitivismen och vår individuella, nationalistiska och västerlänska civilisations stolthet som ligger i vägen.

Är ni helt 100% säkra på att chimeror inte har funnits då?
Riktigt, riktigt, riktigt 100%?

Jag har inte sagt bu eller bä om den saken, men om du frågar nu så säger jag att det helt klart är möjligt att nästan alla fantasidjur kan ha funnits någon gång i den delen av historien vi kallar mytologins dimmor.
Drakar, jättar, talande ormar, män och kvinnor med fisksvans eller vingar, varför inte?

Om dessa djur idag existerar:

http://declubz.com/blog/wp-content/up ... 08/08/mouse-human-ear.jpg

Så varför inte ett Lejon/Get/Orm med vingar?

Hehe Xtas, tänkte på exakt samma mus med odlat öra på när jag satt och funderade på chimeror och ancient astronauts som klonade lejon.