People just think incorrectly and raise their
offspring to do precisely the same.”
“But it isn’ t all bad. Don’ t you think that industrialization has raised the
standard of living around the world?” I protested. “I didn’ t say that working and money were bad. If you recall, I said that
the way it’ s perceived and utilized in your world is the problem. I support
working as a high-level way to live your life and feel worthy at the same
time. But your question also presupposes a truth that simply does not exist
in your reality—that the industrialized world is better than the
nonindustrialized world. If you look at it realistically , for every higher
standard of living of which you boast, there are expensive prices to pay . If
you improve transportation, you pollute the air . If you build great factories
you fill your world with carcinogens. If you build great weapons you
prepare to destroy your world in a conflagration that is too evil to
contemplate. “In those ‘uncivilized’ places where living standards are so low , people
don’t carry guns or die of cancer . While they can’ t move about as freely as
others, they don’ t breathe and drink industrial waste. They live on their land
rather than storing nuclear weapons on it. They’re close to their loved ones
and don’ t need to drink liquor to get through their day . In reality , a higher
standard of living is a businessman’ s justification for almost everything he
does, and yet when he is most honest with himself, he will say , ‘We were
happiest in the days when we had very little. W e genuinely loved each other
when our goals were only dreams. Sharing them brought us closer together . The lean years of fered so little in the way of externals that we had to turn
inward.’ And that is the nature of happiness. Y ou see, all your suf fering
comes from craving and desire. When you stop to simply live and enjoy ,
suffering also diminishes. Don’ t be too quick to jump to the conclusion that
those ‘uncivilized’ folks with lower living standards have a corner on
misery and an absence of fulfillment and happiness. In fact, you have muchto learn from each other . Instead of defending your great monetary profit
system, which needs no defense, since it works well, look to what you are
doing with it, what you believe it holds for you in the way of happiness. If
you can’ t be just as happy working in your garden as you are in a fancy
night club or working out a business deal, then you’ve yet to understand
that basic truth of your Earthly reality . That is, as I said before, there is no
way to happiness, happiness is the way .”
We had completed two intense discussions and Eykis was as relaxed now
as she had been an hour earlier . It was no ef fort for her to be honest. She
was just as at home talking about religion or management as a kid at a
picnic. She was natural, expressive, and willing to sample anything that was
offered. There was no need for her to try to impress with her vocabulary or
cite statistical evidence for her assertions. She didn’ t have to quote scholars
to buttress her viewpoints. She was her own kind of expert. I moved to the next subject, introducing myself as a leading educator . I
asked her about educational practices on Uranus, and what she had
observed of educational attitudes and institutions on Earth. “How do you view our educational practices, Eykis?” I asked, making it
as open-ended a beginning as possible. “The most alarming thing to me about your entire formal educational
system is the huge gap between what you say you’re doing and what is
actually being done. In virtually all your administrative statements about
education, you declare that your purpose is to encourage individual
thinking, self-actualization, an opportunity for each child to maximize his
potential as a free-thinking person. But I’ve not seen any practices that
carry out these lofty objectives,” she said. “Where do you see evidence of this gap?”
“In almost all your schools. Every time young people seem to be
displaying any creative or free-thinking qualities, they are perceived as
threats and instantly squelched. Few teachers can stand a child who asks,
‘Why?’ Y our educational rewards are doled out to those who conform the
best, to those who please their teachers or do their assignments quickly and
neatly . There are few rewards for independent thinking; in fact in most
instances it appears to be punished. A child who is truly independent of the
need for approval, who shows no signs of guilt or anxiety about it, is
considered a troublemaker . A child who refuses to be just like everybody
else is singled out and asked to feel guilty and repent. Y et these qualities ofbeing guilt-free, independent, and free thinking are what you label as no-
limit or self-actualized behaviors. Again, it just seems unreal to me to find
you stating one thing as an educational objective and doing exactly the
opposite.”
“But children need to be disciplined first so that they can later make free,
independent judgments. That’ s why we stress doing it right, or the
‘teacher ’s way .’ Besides, if everyone did whatever he wanted, there would
be no discipline and it would be literally impossible to teach a class,” I
stated in my best “educationese.”
“I find it impossible to imagine how a child can learn to be a free thinker
by being trained for the opposite. It would be like training someone to be a
great runner by forcing him to sit down all his life. A classroom in which
children are all busily pursuing individual objectives isn’ t necessarily a
chaotic one. It could be one in which there’ s excitement, instead of the
apathy I noted in virtually every classroom on your planet. Individuals
could be helping each other in classrooms. They could have busy , creative
arenas, a miniature real world if you will, for exploring any subject at all. Instead, students are told to sit in their assigned seats and quietly do as
they’re told. This leads straight to the incorrect, neurotic thinking we have
discussed.”
“Do you feel that an entire classroom sitting quietly is not a proper
learning environment?”
“It’s not a question of proper or improper environment. It simply is not a
learning environment. Y ou know each person in your world is unique and
special. How can you tap that uniqueness when each child is treated the
same way?” she asked me. “But I don’ t see how that is being done in our classrooms on Earth,” I
protested. “Well, here’ s what I observed. On Monday a teacher introduces a new
subject, Egyptian history , say. The teacher gives the same material to every
student. They are all exposed to the same lecture and discussion, they all
read the same book, they all do the same homework assignments, and on
Friday they are all given the same tests. Do you follow and agree so far?”
she asked. “Yes, yes, go on,” I said. “The students who perform best on the test are given an A, those who
‘pass’ receive a C or a D, and some fail. There are no provisions for thoseindividual dif ferences that are an integral part of your reality . Why is it
assumed that everyone will assimilate such information at the same rate? Why is the student who got only half the answers correct because he may
need two weeks to learn the material punished with a low grade? Why
should they all be expected to perform at exactly the same rate? What about
the students who need only a day to master Egyptian history but need
fifteen days for long division? Why are they forced to sit there quietly
listening to material they’ve already mastered? I’ll tell you why if you’re
interested.”
“Please do,” I said. “The answer is, you treat them all the same. Y ou teach them all the same
way, in the same amount of time, and call those who can learn exactly that
way the fastest, the smartest. In my reality , being able to assimilate
something faster than someone else has to do with one thing, speed. Y our
educational logic guarantees there will always be average and below
average students. Y ou insist that everyone conform to a standard norm. Y ou
teach all your young people to think and act alike. But what do you have to
offer your world if you are just like everybody else? Y ou insure this through
the insane pursuit of grades, those educational merit badges you dispense
on report cards and transcripts. These are the real obsession of educators on
Earth—not knowledge and self-discovery , but the pursuit of those external
rewards called grades. Moreover , these grades that you’ve elevated to this
almighty status have absolutely nothing to do with being educated in
reality ,” she declared hotly . This seemed to be an area that Urantians felt
very strongly about. “But what’ s wrong with providing rewards in the form of grades for
educational excellence?” I asked. “Grades and knowledge are mutually exclusive ideas. In fact, grades
actually serve to lower motivation for knowledge,” she replied. “Why are they mutually exclusive?” I asked. “A grade is an external mark. It signifies for an individual that he/she has
participated in the game of education. Knowledge is an inner mark. It is
reflected in (1) how you feel about what you’ve learned, (2) how it aids you
in pursuing your ideals, and (3) what you as a person can do with that
knowledge. Knowledge breeds self-awareness: grades breed self-deception. A grade on a transcript has nothing to do with reality . It is a symbol of
having conformed, and even here on Earth, where people misperceive theirreality so regularly , grades still have very little relation to reality . Nobody
looks at a transcript two years after college, and certainly you wouldn’ t
want to assess a grownup person’ s ability on the basis of an academic
transcript. The person who received all As only a year ago might fail every
one of those same examinations today . On Earth, it’ s how well you
currently produce that earns you respect and personal advancement. “Oftentimes those who can play the academic game well are actually ill
equipped to participate in the real world. And on the other hand, many who
refuse to pursue grades neurotically in school turn out to be more reality
oriented and hence much more successful at virtually everything they do. Plain and simple, the educational world on Earth seems to be located in an
‘unreal’ sphere,” she said. “But you said earlier that grades actually lower motivation in individuals. Do you mean to tell me that you think our educational system actually
detracts from human motivation on Earth?” I asked. “Precisely ,” she said. “When you place an Earth person in a system in
which the reward—the grade—is unrelated to the actual learning activity ,
motivation is lowered. For example, if you give an A to a person who reads
five books, or completes fifty push-ups, a B for four books and forty push-
ups, and so on down the line, who do you think will ever want to read a
hundred books or do a thousand push-ups? Almost no one, that’ s who. Y our
system says, strive for the reward and work only when you are being
rewarded. Since the reward of an A has nothing to do in reality with either
reading or push-ups, then motivation will cease when the reward is
achieved,” she concluded. “So how could it be changed?” I asked. “First, the rewards for learning must be aligned with the actual activity of
learning. The reward for reading is not located on a transcript, it’ s within. It’s the joy of being able to comprehend life through writers, the thrill of
getting lost in a novel or discovering and applying a new idea; the freedom
one achieves by being able to experience what others have thought; the
inner glow and self-satisfaction of reading for personal growth. These are
the rewards of reading. Similarly , the personal sense of accomplishment one
feels when he is in top physical condition, the glorious feeling that comes
from being physically fit, the ability to climb stairs without pausing to catch
your breath, to run without feeling exhausted, to eat and sleep peacefully , to
bask in your own self-pride at being superbly healthy—these are therewards for doing push-ups. When you begin to align your rewards in
education with the actual educational activity , motivation will increase and
apathy will decline, and not one moment before,” she said emphatically . “And teachers, what about their role?” I asked. “When it comes to teachers you again confuse your reality . On Earth, no
one can teach you anything. Y ou make a decision to know what you know ,
and any experienced teacher will tell you that when confronted with a
student who has decided not to know something, such as algebra, no
amount of ‘teaching’ is going to get that algebra across. That is your reality . Conversely , when a student decides to learn algebra, no amount of teacher
interference will alter that decision. It seems to me that all Earthlings have
the inner capacity to learn anything either with the aid of, or in spite of,
teachers. T ruly great teachers understand this, and deliberately go about
their business of providing a unique environment for individuals to make
choices to learn. Furthermore, they emphasize learning for mastery , rather
than striving for grades.”
“What do you mean by learning for mastery?”
“Mastery means that the goal of education is to master the curriculum. How long it takes is quite irrelevant. It means that individuals take tests
when they are ready to see how much they have mastered, rather than on a
test day set aside for everyone. Mastery means no punishment for being
slower or faster at mastering a subject. Mastery means that when you
acquire knowledge, you get inner satisfaction, plus the A if you need the
grade for record-keeping purposes. The results are personal satisfaction and
inner pride, and one receives a grade of Mastery  when he demonstrates
mastery of the material. In a mastery system, people want to help each
other , rather than compete for the few trophies that educators make
available in the form of grades, honor societies, and the like. Students have
freedom to develop in areas of personal interest and explore challenging
subjects without fear of ‘failing.’ Cooperation rather than competition is the
style of learning, and cheating is impossible,” she said. “Cheating is impossible?” I repeated. “Yes, how could anyone cheat when the goal of education is to assist
each individual toward his own levels of excellence? T ell me, how can you
cheat when the rewards are inner rather than outer -directed?”
“Well, I never thought about it like that,” I said.“Imagine a person taking a test to see how prepared he or she is to move
on to the next level of learning. That person is going to assess his or her
own progress on any given subject. How could anybody cheat? I saw a
study in which you Earthlings tested chickens to see which ones were dumb
and which smart. A length of chicken wire was set up in front of their feed,
and the ones you labeled dumb sat still and ultimately died of starvation. The chickens you labeled smart walked around the barrier and got at their
food. Now when chickens go around barriers for their external rewards,
they’re labeled smart, but when students do the same thing, you label it
cheating.”
“But how could we possibly allow children to copy from each other
without punishing them! Don’ t they have to learn self-reliance, which you
seem to feel is lacking?” I asked. “Children can be encouraged to help each other achieve their maximum
personal knowledge levels. In a world of individuals, comparing children to
each other is a senseless activity . If your children were in an educational
system that prized knowledge, they would soon learn cooperation rather
than competition. Y our entire world is composed of people competing
against each other . While competition without scorn on a playground is fun
and healthy , in the real world it breeds antagonisms, hatreds, nationalism,
and theories of racial superiority . The schools are the one place where you
can begin to foster a sense of working together . What would a child have to
gain by copying for an examination in a mastery arrangement? absolutely
nothing! The purpose of the exam is not to reward or to punish, but to help
young people assess their personal progress. There shouldn’ t be any
stultifying group examinations or comparison of results. These would be
replaced by a healthy atmosphere of cooperation and helping. If this same
quality were transferred to your governments, you would end most of the
petty squabbles and power plays that create wars and bitter hatreds. Teachers can do a great deal toward basing education on knowledge rather
than the competitive acquisitions mentality that currently exists.”
“How?” I asked. I wanted her to be specific. “They can get the external-reward, money-oriented business philosophy
out of education. Students confronted with a rigid, authoritarian teacher will
perform only in the presence of that authoritarian figure. As is true in
business, when the authoritarian teacher leaves the room, students abandon
the pretense. If those authoritarian teachers, who take so much pride in theirwell-disciplined classrooms, could only look at their classrooms when they
are not there, they would soon see the results of their rigidity . The fact is
that when formal schooling is complete, the teachers are permanently out of
the room. Students who have been exposed to them for long periods of time
dally for the rest of their lives. They soon despise all learning activities
because they are associated with rigid authoritarian thinking. T eachers in a
reality-only system of mastery learning are educating young people to
become their own teachers. The presence of the authority figure in the room
has nothing to do with the individual pursuit of knowledge and excellence. I’ve noticed here that in colleges and institutions of higher education the
students actually buy their knowledge points with money . Those who stay
with it and purchase more credits receive the highest external educational
rewards. Y et your world is populated with Ph.D.s and many others who
have purchased considerable knowledge credits and can’ t even write a clear
thought, much less get a job. The only jobs they seem to want are those that
provide them with institutional credibility for helping others purchase more
external knowledge points.”
“Do you have any final thoughts on how we can make our educational
systems more ef fective?” I asked, indicating that we were drawing to a
close on this subject. “It’s simply a matter of becoming more reality based. Knowledge is
internal. Acquisitions are external. Y ou say you’re concerned about
knowledge and the inner person, yet all your educational ener gy is
channeled to externals such as grades, test scores, diplomas, degrees, and
titles. Educating for knowledge, which your reality permits so nicely , is
missing because your educators are thinking incorrectly about ends, as
opposed to putting your ener gy into means,  which reflect a world of unique
individuals all of whom deserve specialized education. Y our children can
emer ge from their educational experiences excited about the prospects of
being knowledgeable for the pure joy it brings, as well as the limitless
opportunities available to a person of knowledge. But too often they emer ge
from the educational maze like one of the flock, looking, thinking, and
bleating just like everyone else,” she said, and stopped right there. I never grew weary talking with Eykis. She had deliberately minimized
references to Uranus during our three conversations because her gifts were
not to be a comparison of our two worlds but a legacy for all of us on Earth
from someone who viewed us through special eyes. She had conveyed tome what Uranus was like. She had been surprised at the “unreal,” or , as she
called it, “incorrect” thinking she had found in her initial observations of us. Like any realist she had internalized what she noted and accepted us as we
are. Y et she knew how to slice through what “we are” when it masked what
we “could become.” As she had said to me several times, “On Uranus we
are trapped by our reality , but your potential for magnificence as a whole
planet of free thinkers is almost unimaginable.” It was in this context that
she of fered her gifts. She didn’ t want to create a wordy document. Instead,
she was giving us wonderfully honest and sensible briefings, and I was
content now to become another character for Eykis to inform in her own
peerless style. “I represent the practice of medicine,” I said. “What have you noticed
about my profession in your visit here?”
“I’m really quite surprised at your planet’ s perceptions of health. A
philosophy of sickness rather than wellness seems to run through the
general population as well as the medical community ,” she said. “What do you mean by sickness philosophy?” I asked her . “I am accustomed to a very dif ferent approach to medicine. On Uranus
the patient pays his doctor a monthly retainer to keep him healthy . If he
becomes ill, payments stop until the doctor gets him well. On Earth, people
expect to get sick. They program themselves to anticipate getting worse. Those who think ‘sick’ come to believe they can’ t get healthy again without
medical treatment and drugs. This, once again, is incorrect thinking, and it
manifests itself particularly in the way you view your bodies and in your
expectations for being healthy . “Your health is directly related to how you use your minds. Those of you
who think positively about yourselves have positive expectations all
through life. This includes your expectations for wellness. I’ve noticed
people saying things like ‘I feel a cold coming on. It will probably get
worse and be in my chest tomorrow . I expect I’ll have a fever soon and have
to take a few days of f from work this week.’ And sure enough, these people
create a self-fulfilling sickness prophecy . I’ve further noticed that when
people expect to get worse, they seldom disappoint themselves,” she said. “So you feel that if people were taught to think dif ferently , that is
correctly, as you put it, that they wouldn’ t be af flicted with colds and other
minor ailments?” I asked.“Precisely . I’ve seen positive thinking represented on Earth. Those
people who don’ t focus on their ailments, who actually expect a minor cold
or flu symptom to improve rather than get worse, who don’ t complain to
others, are much less susceptible to these maladies. Y ou are lucky here on
Earth. Health is, for the most part, a choice. Y ou can choose to be healthy ,
but few of you do it,” she added. “But what do you mean by choice? ” I asked. “Surely you don’ t think
people choose all their illnesses?”
“Yes, I do, with inherited debilities being the only exceptions, and even
the extent to which these ‘unchosen af flictions’ immobilize a patient is
directly related to attitudes and choices. Look, let me turn it around and ask
you, the doctor , a question. Is there anything you would trade for your good
health?”
“Nothing. W ithout good health one would die,” I responded. “So you see, it is the single most important facet of your personal life,
correct?” she asked. “Certainly . Nothing is more important to an individual than good health. I
think everyone here would agree with that, since ultimately an absence of
health means an end to life,” I answered. “Then would you please explain to me why so few of you think and
behave in ways that are healthy if health is at the top of your list of personal
priorities? This kind of unhealthy thinking is really a mystery to me.”
“I’m not sure I know what you mean by unhealthy thinking,” I said. “Attitudes toward sickness and health,” she snapped back. “Y ou consume
things that anyone can see are poison in countless quantities. T obacco,
alcohol, fatty foods, preservatives, drugs—you seem to treat your bodies as
if you didn’ t know that these self-defeating attitudes which lead to self-
destructive behaviors are harmful. Y et you know they are. Y ou print
warnings on your packages, and people still consume these poisons. It’ s all
a choice,” she said. “Do you think this is another reflection of our wrong thinking?” I asked. “Of course it is. Y ou’ve trained yourselves to think in sick ways, and
you’ve also trained yourselves to fulfill this sickness thinking in the ways
you live. But it goes far beyond poor body habits and thinking sick. It has to
do with how you approach this whole business of holistic versus sickness
thinking. Y our medical profession is sickness rather than wellness oriented. Everyone teaches about illness. Almost no one teaches about health. Y ourdoctors see patients when they don’ t feel well, or when something overtly
appears to be wrong. Their role is to correct what has gone wrong, or , more
precisely , what has been allowed to go wrong. People on Earth go to
doctors to be fixed up and brought back to normal. No one seems to think
about living beyond the normal, especially those in the medical and helping
professions,” she said. “We doctors do have to operate this way , we have to treat those in need,”
I offered, still assuming the role of a leading medical practitioner . “Why not a medical profession which helps people to transcend their
sickness thinking and uses doctors primarily as persons who help people to
become as healthy as possible, and only secondarily as repairers of the
sick?” Eykis asked. “We do try to teach preventive medicine and holistic thinking. W e are
simply overworked and overcrowded, with so many sick people that current
work loads preclude shifting gears to what you propose,” I stated. “That too is incorrect thinking. The medical world relies on its sickness
mentality and reinforces it in virtually all of its practices. Doctors are the
ones dispensing those huge numbers of tranquilizers used for your
nonexistent anxiety attacks. It is doctors who perform the unnecessary
surgery that has become a way of life in medical practices. Doctors
hurriedly write out prescriptions for every ailment on your planet, lar gely
because they are victims of their own erroneous thinking.”
“How are we victims of our thinking?” I asked somewhat testily . “You think that you are the healers, and that the medicines you dispense
are doing the healing within the body . This is incorrect,” she stated firmly . “But how can you say that? Look at what medicine has done on our
planet. Life expectancies have increased, some forms of virulent diseases
have been eradicated, and doctors improve people’ s lives every day ,” I
reminded her . “Of course, many diseases have been eliminated and life expectancies
have increased, but let’ s give the credit where it belongs. The body , not you,
is the hero! Y our bodies are perfect creations. No doctor can heal a broken
bone. Only a body which is working properly can do that. No doctor can
eliminate polio; only bodies can do that, by building up inner resistances. Just because you administer the immunization and write out the prescription
doesn’ t mean that you are the healer . As educators must train their young to
be their own teachers, and parents must aid their children to become theirown parents, so, too, must doctors teach their patients to become their own
doctors. Each person must be taught to use his own inherent healing
properties. But most doctors don’ t do this because they don’ t believe in it. They choose to believe that they actually do the healing. Consequently they
perpetuate the very same incorrect thinking which leads to so much
unnecessary sickness in your world.”
“It sounds as if you have very little regard for our medical profession,” I
said. “Quite the contrary ,” Eykis shot right back. “The medical profession is
perhaps the most advanced of all of your institutions. The training methods
for weeding out incompetence are superb. The people are highly motivated
and actually exceedingly competent. What needs repair are the incorrect
beliefs about what constitutes health services, and who does the healing,”
she said. “And how would you help to correct this?” I asked. “First, I would help the medical profession to see the advantages of
holistic wellness thinking. I could envision people going to their doctors,
not because they were sick, but because they wanted to get even healthier . Doctors could serve primarily to help people acquire mental attitudes which
would preclude psychosomatic illnesses. They could monitor their nutrition
intake, their exercise, their heart rate, their lung power , blood count, and
endurance. People would begin seeing doctors not as rectifiers to achieve
normalcy , but as people who helped them go beyond basic normal health to
super health. People would become wellness oriented. Doctors would
facilitate this from birth, instead of fighting it and acting as if anyone who
comes along and recommends anything other than drugs or sur gery is a
quack. Doctors seem to fear innovation, despite their involvement in
research, particularly as it relates to human health. In W estern cultures they
are usually the first to reject any nondrug or nonmedical approach to human
health. Such practices as meditation, biofeedback, hypnosis, yoga,
nutritional therapy , acupuncture, or anything else which they know little
about, are immediately denounced as shams by the medical profession, and
it often takes many years for doctors to accept them even grudgingly . You
seem to be exceedingly protective of your one-way approach to health and
extremely reluctant to admit that there may be other approaches that could
be combined with traditional medical practices to create an entire network
of wellness-oriented practitioners.”“And then?” I said, wanting her to go on. “And then I would reexamine the proclivity you have for hanging onto
medicines as healers. Y ou must look toward the vast mending potential of
your minds. I would train people to stop seeking external miracle cures and
begin looking inward, to examine the limitless capacity that your mind and
body have for convalescence and health. So much of your Earthly sickness
is located in your minds. This is due to a lifetime of expectation that some
sickness is normal, and that when it comes along it should be treated with
external rather than internal elixirs. Moreover , I would look at your medical
beliefs themselves, such as the routine use of sur gery to remove healthy
organs in the body , and immobilization for virtually all ailments, when
perhaps vigorous exercise to promote circulation would be more conducive
to health. So much of your medical thinking seems to center on the notion
that people are weak and fragile, and that an injury always requires rest. Y et
the time it takes for healing is greatly decreased in active people. Activity is
almost always frowned upon, lar gely because so many doctors appear to be
a much more sedentary lot than I had imagined they would be. “I see doctors smoking and drinking, often overweight, and actually
becoming addicted themselves, while simultaneously dispensing medical
advice. This is a prospect that I must confess eludes my logical mind. I see
the overemphasis on drugs as a major area of medical malpractice. Drugs
for headaches, cramps, tension, and even anxiety . This overreliance on
drugs comes from your external mindset in medicine. Y ou believe that
something outside the person caused the illness (such as a virus going
around, the cold season, flu bugs, old age, a draft), and consequently you
look to something outside yourselves for a cure. This attitude explains your
overreliance on drugs and your obsession with tablets as panaceas for
everything. But the process of healing, like everything else, is already
located within those patients you treat. Positive attitudes toward health as a
means of abolishing sickness, and the mind as healer , are often treated as
heresy by doctors, who cannot see the truth because they are blinded by
their own rigid education.”
“And that truth is?” I inserted. “And that truth is that no doctor on your planet has ever healed anyone. The mind and body do the healing, and doctor ’s treatments can only
facilitate that process. Until doctors educate themselves and their patients
on the great healing capacities of your perfect bodies, you will continue tohave a world which is becoming increasingly and needlessly drug
dependent,” she concluded. “Can people really alter their proclivity toward serious illness with their
minds?” I asked. “Positively . Your mind is the captain of the ship called your body . Whatever is going on inside it, is controlled by that captain, and he uses
only a tiny fragment of his potential in the process of being well. Every
doctor on your planet knows about the will to live. They can’ t directly put
their fingers on it, but they know that patients with a strong will to live have
a much greater chance of surviving any serious illness or major sur gery. That will needs to be cultivated in everyone and reflected in healthful,
wellness-oriented approaches toward life. “Doctors seldom question the ability of the mind to be destructive. They
know that a ‘tense thinking’ mind can actually create an ulcer or high blood
pressure. But somehow they find it dif ficult to act as if they believe that that
same mind is capable of curing the ulcer , or lowering the blood pressure. Instead they rely on drugs. They know that the mind can alter the chemistry
of the body and promote disease, yet they disdain those who train the same
mind to reverse the process. The medical profession still wants to hang onto
medicine and treatment as the approach to health, lar gely because doctors
practice external incorrect thinking. When you begin to see the limitless
potential of the human body for healing itself, you will be taking a big step
forward. Then you can prescribe your medicines as ancillary to the healing
process, and put the focus of healing where it belongs, within the patient. As always the inner person is ignored by professionals of all stripes, and
your medical profession is no exception. Y ou have an advantage over us on
Uranus in that your within  is controlled by free will, yet you seldom take
advantage of it for your own benefit.”
She could have gone on telling me about our medical practices, but we
had a great deal left to discuss, and the day was going by much too quickly . “I would like very much to know your reaction to our governments and
how they serve our people here on Earth,” I said to Eykis, shifting to my
fifth and final role of the morning. “Your governments do not serve your people. They are not designed for
such purposes,” she answered without a change of expression. “What are their purposes then, as you see them, Eykis?”“They are created to serve the ends of those who work in them, although
they all say that they are created to serve the will of the people.”
“Do you think all governments ignore the will of the people?” I asked
her. “Yes, although some do it to a much greater degree than others. Governments here seem to be in the power business. When those who are
outside your governments try to gain control of the reins of power , they talk
about how the will of the people is being subverted, and then, when they
manage to get into the government, they proceed to behave the same way
themselves. Somehow , on Earth, power itself seems to corrupt, and those
who are in power are much more interested in expanding their spheres of
influence than in actually serving the needs and wishes of the people,” she
said. “As a representative of governments, I’d like you to explain to me how
you see this taking place,” I said in my best semi-demanding tone, befitting
a government of ficial in a position of world leadership. “Fine,” she said. “I’ll be happy to. If you take a poll of all the peoples on
Earth, you will find that with the exception of a small group of your
generals and a handful of soldiers, every single person on your planet wants
peace—not war . Yet you are constantly at war with each other . Moreover ,
your entire planet stands precariously at the edge of total extinction through
the stockpiling of unwanted nuclear weapons. People on Earth want to live
harmoniously . I know , I looked into this all over your world. Y et your
governments still act in ways that contradict the people’ s wishes. All your
wars have been brought about by government people who decide to send
your young men and women of f to die. These young people obey
commands, such as killing fellow humans, that conflict deeply with what
they feel as humans, yet they do it. Y ou all want peace, yet your
governments keep all the people of your planet either at war or on the brink
of war .”
“But war and readiness for war are necessary reactions to avoid being
conquered by enemies. And like it or not, that is our reality ,” I said. “If you devoted the same ener gy and money to peace and to helping
people use their individuality , you would eliminate war . You fail to see that
killing each other is the absolute lowest level to which humans can sink. Y et
your people do everything possible to keep your society on a level that
always blames the enemy  for your own lowest level of thinking,” she said.“But how can the training to be individuals do anything but create
anarchy and increase the possibility of war?” I asked. “You must begin to use your vast government powers to train individuals
to think ethically . A world of ethical thinkers would not create warriors. Ethical people would refuse to invent something as evil as napalm. No
salesman could ever sell it. No factory personnel could ever mass produce
it. No trucker could ever transport it. No generals could ever order it to be
used on people. And no soldiers could ever scorch human bodies with it. You see, the entire chain of human beings that creates something as
devastatingly stupid and evil as war is broken when you have individuals
who think ethically , rather than like the herd. One individual, deciding to
trust his inner voices, can break a chain that depends on blind obedience for
its very survival. Once you begin to use your governments for such a
purpose, you will defeat the ugliness of war forever . Make no mistake about
it, the governments of the world have the power to make this happen.”
“But can we tolerate too many of these free-willed, ethical individuals if
we are to survive?” I asked. “Your survival as a people depends solely on individual thinkers. Look at
the most repressive of all of your governments. The totalitarian and
dictatorial regimes that populate your planet are most successful where
people think like the herd, not as individuals. These people are trained in
conformity and nationalism, racial pride and historical animosities. They all
think alike. They are obedient because they are told to be that way . Conversely , your freest societies were built on individualism. They were
founded by people leaving repressive governments, religious fascism, and
the divine right of kings. Throughout your history authoritarianism has
failed to take hold where people were encouraged to think for themselves
and to question absolute authority . Great societies are composed of great
individuals who refuse to be told how to think and act as a unit. Totalitarianism and dictatorships flourish only when lar ge collections of
people suspend their individuality for the betterment of the state. The proof
of your Earthly capacity for individualism can be seen by those who risk
death to speak out while living in dictatorial nations. Individual freedom of
thought is a flame not easily extinguished,” she said. “But you said earlier that all of our governments fail to serve the will of
the people,” I reminded her .“You’re right, and I said it because it’ s so. The degree to which the
people’ s will is submer ged is greater in places where individuals are not
permitted to express their own unique thoughts when they conflict with the
official views of the government, but the will of the people is seldom the
primary consideration of any government. The individuals who comprise
the government are more concerned with themselves than those they are
pledged to serve. For example, your government passes laws requiring
mandatory retirement ages in various occupations and votes to exempt
members of the government from the benefit  of these very same laws. They
vote to allow themselves special treatment in declaring expenses, and deny
these same privileges to everyone in the country except lawmakers. They
vote social security taxes which are almost confiscatory and exempt
themselves from having to pay . They pass civil rights laws and exempt
themselves from the provisions of the law that apply to all but the
privileged lawmakers. They tell the people to sacrifice and yet the people
are expected to pay for limousines and drivers for government
representatives who use the money of the people to pay for their special
privileges. They refuse to legislate medical benefits for the people, and then
use the people’ s money to create their own medical insurance, which,
incidentally , involves the most comprehensive free medical attention
available anywhere on this planet. The fact is that the government
representatives on Earth, be they elected or self-appointed, serve
themselves, with the earnings of the people,” she said, her voice almost
racing by now . “But isn’ t government necessary , even if it corrupts its representatives?” I
asked. “Do not be mistaken about this. Governments do NOT corrupt their
representatives, the representatives corrupt their governments,” she stated
emphatically . “Of course government is necessary , but you must look
carefully at what you expect from the people in your government. If you
want them to think and act for you, the results will be the kind of
unresponsive governments that you’ve created. Y ou seem to for get that
power is only in the hands of the government because your people allow it. With so many externally oriented ‘wrong thinkers’ in your world, it is not
surprising that your governments take on the same flavor . You want your
governments to do everything for you, and then you complain because they
take away your freedom. Y ou can’ t have it both ways.”“So what can we do to make governments responsive to the will of the
people?” I asked. “Take responsibility for your own lives rather than asking the
government to do it for you,” she declared, adding: “The real function of
government is not to control the people, but to provide the people with a
means for creating a society that works. Y et your governments seem
preoccupied with controlling, monitoring, regulating, and snooping into
everyone’ s daily life. Y ou regulate literally every aspect of human
enterprise on your planet. Y ou have government rules, forms, red tape, and
regulatory procedures for everything from transportation to sexual conduct. You have rules on every subject that af fect every one of you, and you give
the government the responsibility for making your societies work. For
example, your governments debate the issue of abortion endlessly and pass
laws about it, never for a moment understanding that the very existence of
those laws creates horrible conditions. A woman who wants an abortion, for
whatever reason, isn’ t going to be deterred because it is illegal. Legality is
unrelated to her decision. She will abort if she chooses, but if there is a law
against it, the existence of that law will increase her likelihood of
unprofessional medical care and possibly her own death. Government
people pass unethical laws all the time, but those laws are not what
determine people’ s behavior at all.”
“But people are basically law abiding,” I said. “When the laws make sense. And when they don’ t make sense, thinking
people ignore them. Y ou have laws against marijuana and gambling, for
instance, which by their very existence on the law books create a network
of smugglers, pushers, under ground or ganized crime, and the like. In reality ,
some two hundred and fifty million of your people smoke marijuana
regularly , and almost all of you gamble when the mood strikes, yet the
presence of laws against these activities increases the prospect of illegal,
evil conduct throughout all your cultures.”
“Wouldn’ t legalizing gambling and marijuana be endorsing something
that is not viewed by the majority as proper?” I asked. “Do you want to talk about reality or fantasy?” she shot back. “Drug laws
which protect the unknowing from charlatans and profiteers may serve a
useful purpose. Education on the impact, side ef fects, and status of drug
research would be necessary as a substitute to legislation. If in reality one
third of the people do something, regardless of the laws against it, that iswhat is,  and no amount of law enforcment is going to change it. If that’ s the
case, then stop the wrong thinking. Be responsive to the wishes of the
people. Clean it up. Use it as a revenue source. Keep it away from young
children, and stop pretending that because you have passed a law against
something and then proved you can’ t enforce it, you have done your job. In
fact, you are hurting people by even bothering to have the law on the books
in the first place. The fact that an activity is widespread in your culture
means that it is endorsed. Whether you pass laws against it or not has
nothing to do with reality . The people are still going to conduct themselves
as they see fit, and your governments are simply going to involve a whole
host of unsavory characters in the process of trying unsuccessfully to
legislate morality and everyday behavior .”
“How do we get people into government who will be responsive to the
wishes of the people?” I asked her . “By changing the way you think, as well as the way you train people to
think. Like everything else you’ve asked me, it boils down to your thinking. The people in government come from the same population that thinks
incorr ectly . There are very few risk takers in your population, very few
honest, no-non-sense, reality-oriented people. Those you do have are
usually ostracized and labeled as deviants. Y our government representatives
come from the general population and they impose the same wrong-way
thinking in their tasks as lawmakers. Y ou need people in government who
are not afraid of losing their jobs—people who do not derive their personal
value from their jobs, but from within. When people have a strong inner
sense of value, they are never manipulated by fear of losing a job, since
they know they can always move on and do virtually anything. Y ou need
people who see themselves as part of the people  and who consequently
would never enact a privileged set of laws for themselves and a less
privileged set for everyone else. Once you begin the quality-minded and
ethical rethinking process, you will elect ethical people to work for you in
your governments.”
She was obviously keenly aware of this issue and clearly saw the results
of too much government and too few individual thinkers within the
government. I don’ t think she would have been branded liberal or
conservative. When I asked her about these labels she laughed and commented, “These
are labels that critics need in order to compartmentalize and slot theirrepresentatives. I am a realist. I don’ t know what your labels mean. I
despise your current welfare system, in which your government acts as if it
were its own money that it dispenses. There is no such thing as welfare or
government money in your reality . There are only individuals who are
working, sending in money , and having it redistributed to people who do
not work. If anyone does not work and is able, he ought to be required to
pay back any money he receives while temporarily on welfare. Y et I also
abhor the idea of the truly needy going without money . But the Earthly
attitude appears to hold no objection to the truly needy receiving their share
of the working people’ s money . They only object to entire generations of
people who have chosen not to work expecting to be supported. Similarly , I
feel that the concept of unemployment is something that governments have
created so they will have an index. How can something called
‘unemployment’ exist when there are jobs going begging? A laid-of f
engineer who refuses to work as a sales clerk, which he is capable of doing,
is not unemployed. He simply refuses to work. An attitude that something is
owed to each person beyond the opportunity to take a risk, or that any work
is superior , or inferior , is more wrong thinking. Y our governments are made
up of people who want to stay in power . They do everything they can to
keep it that way , and you will continue to create unresponsive governments
as long as you raise people who have to rely on power over others rather
than their own inner sources of power over themselves to prove their
worth.”
“Why are people willing to put up with this kind of treatment from
lawmakers?” I asked. “They aren’ t, except for short periods of time. In some places on your
planet, you see people who have almost nothing living and working side by
side with those who abuse them and exploit their labor for their own selfish
ends. But this will not last. Y our history has shown you this. Eventually the
people rebel and start a revolution. On Earth, the disproportion between
haves and have-nots is growing. Starvation on your planet is a government
decision. It is a political fact, not a necessity as your government
representatives in various parts of your planet would like the people to
believe. “People on Earth starve because it is accepted as normal, even with an
abundance of food and the technology necessary to feed everyone. Governments allow it because they are consumed with power needs.Starvation is actually a tool they use to meet these needs. I saw tons and
tons of food rotting on docks, while people starved only a few miles away
on your planet. The reason, I learned in observing your government
representatives around your globe, had to do with eligibility requirements,
inspection regulations, paperwork, which prohibited the distribution of the
food. This starvation was indeed a government decision. As the
disproportion grows, the have-nots will stop accepting it. They will create
revolutions that will force governments to be responsible to all people. They accept it now because they lack individual leaders who will lead the
fight. But as those leaders materialize and surface, you will see dramatic
shifts in power through force, unless you begin to elect, peacefully and
purposefully , representatives to your governments who think realistically
and correctly.”
“So you feel that our politicians, lawyers, and governments are generally
afflicted with this same kind of ‘incorrectness’ in their thinking. They fail to
see reality for what it is?” I asked, attempting to summarize. “Yes, with the added bonus that the power over others corruption factor
seems to be at work here. Y our governments create massive military
organizations which allow for absolutely no individual thought. In fact, they
punish such thinking as a violation of the chain of command. Then these
military units, with almost mind-boggling lethal capacities for destruction,
are amassed and run by obedience-minded people who despise questions
from anyone. Then you find yourselves fighting wars against your own
people, wars that nobody wants. Y our non-military government functions
are run with the same insensitive logic. Y ou have individuals speaking
about the need to economize who raise certain budgets when they get into
office. They know what must be done, but their desire to stay in power
permanently corrupts their thinking. The delusionary thinking of politicians
continues unabated, and governments go on treating individuals as one big
conglomerate which has no will or mind of its own. Until your governments
begin to see those faceless masses as individual thinking people who will
refuse, first as individuals, and then as masses, to continue sacrificing so
that those in power may be kept more comfortably powerful, they will be
looking directly into the mirror of their own demise. Y our citizens will
tolerate it, but only to a point. “First you will see them lower their own taxes by passively refusing to
pay, by surreptitiously going around the law . Then you’ll see peopleignoring the regulations and bypassing the governmental red tape that they
depend upon for their very survival. Soon after , you will see a disregard for
all laws, which at one time were only a few laws. This is how it breaks
down. Only individuals with integrity , who think as the world is, rather than
as they would like the world to be for their own personal advantage, can
make your governments responsive to the individuals they are pledged to
serve. But I didn’ t see any governments like that on your planet, and I
looked earnestly .”
“Is there any barometer we can use to see if we are headed in the
direction you advise?” I asked. “When there are no starving children on your planet, when there are
enough day-care centers, when immunizations for all your children are
readily available and fully funded, and when your governments have to
conduct bake sales to raise money for their battleships and missiles, then
and only then will you be in the place to which I refer . Speaking of bake
sales, let’ s go to lunch,” she said, informing me that she was putting an end
to this portion of her gifts. OceanofPDF .com8 
 Some Reality-Only Reactions
This was to be our last afternoon together . Eykis would be leaving the next
morning. I knew she would not change her mind. She was a woman of her
word. There was never any doubt about that. I was forced to suspend my
own feelings for her , and to get on with her gifts to us. Returning to the
recording studio, I began the new tape. “Eykis, you have discussed religion, business, education, medicine and
government. Y ou have described what you saw and what you feel might be
done to bring the messages and objectives of these disciplines into a new ,
beneficial alignment with reality . One major theme seems to emer ge from
your observations. W e on Earth have a proclivity for thinking incorrectly , as
you put it, and for placing far too much emphasis on external rather than
internal processing. Is this a correct summary?” I asked. “Quite correct,” she responded without hesitation. Continuing this
thought, she added, “Y ou have become a people obsessed with thinking for
each other , which is a polite way of saying, manipulating each other . Your
governments want to think for their constituents, to regulate their lives, as if
they couldn’ t make healthy decisions on their own. Y our doctors insist that
they are the only experts and classify anyone else who might lay claim to
healthy thinking as an unqualified interloper . Your businesspeople feel that
money is the source of happiness, and view inner happiness as the purview
of hippies or unrealistic eggheads. Y our educators insist that they know
what others need, and they pursue external acquisitions rather than
knowledge. Y our religious leaders impose. ‘God’ s will’ on others, always
assuming that God is an external to be reached, rather than an inner concept
to be experienced. The representatives from all five of your areas believe
that they know what is best for others, and they spend their ener gy trying to
impose what they know on those whom they serve. But your reality denies
them the opportunity to do what they think they are doing. Thus they live anillusion and this illusion requires them to invent a thinking process to fit the
illusion,” she said. “Well, in lieu of wearing additional hats this afternoon,” I said, “I would
like to give you some things to simply comment on, and then close with the
ideas that you feel we most need. Is that acceptable?”
“I will be myself in any format of your liking,” she replied laconically . “All right, back to your illusions statement about the five topics. Precisely what is the illusion per se?”
“The illusion is that people do not possess free will and therefore can
believe only what they are taught by means of others’ teaching,
proselytizing, governing, healing, or motivating. People on your planet are
choosers, yet the leaders think they can choose for the people, and it simply
isn’t that way . That is the illusion. The road to enlightenment or self-
awareness is an inner path. Leaders can only provide a healthy environment
in which people can attain their own truths,” she said. “Then specifically , what is the thinking process that these ‘leaders’
invent, to support their illusions?” I asked, wanting to be deliberate and
orderly for those who choose to think in these ways. “The incorrect or illusional thinking process goes like this. Since I am an
expert, I must know what is best for everyone. Therefore I will force-feed
them what I know , and they will benefit from it,” she said. “And what would be a nonillusional thinking process for experts in any
field?” I asked, continuing the systematic line of questioning to a
conclusion. “On Earth, people have unique minds. Since each person is dif ferent, one
can never create policies, rules, or procedures that apply to all. The concept
of ‘everyone’ simply does not exist. And on your planet too, your free-
choice minds allow you to decide to learn or not learn, to know or not
know , to obey or disobey , at any moment. Y ou can change your free-choice
minds an unlimited number of times on one issue or in any one moment. You are an ever changing, free-willed people. Correct thinking would
acknowledge this fact and say: Each person must decide for himself what
he wants each day . As a leader , I will expose you to the options and the
likely consequences of these options. I’ll even share my opinion if asked,
but I’ll never confuse it with the opinion, which simply doesn’ t exist. Since
the road to enlightenment is an inner path, I won’ t insist that individuals pay
me a toll for using their own road. It is their road and I’ll help them travel itas they choose, as long as they don’ t attempt to exact tolls from others who
desire to traverse their own highways. That would be ‘correct’ or
nonillusional thinking, and that is what I addressed to the five
representative issues you presented this morning,” she concluded. I decided to shift gears. It was obvious to me that this innerversus-outer -
thinking dilemma was a part of virtually all of our Earthly undertakings. If I
engaged Eykis as General, Attorney , Florist, or Mechanic, the logic would
still be the same. Her reality-only thinking always pointed to the illusional
folly that she had just elaborated. “I would like to have you comment briefly on several areas of interest to
all human beings,” I began. “What do you feel about par enting  as it is
practiced here?”
“Here on Earth, I noted a strong desire of parents to believe that they own
their children. The illusion is obvious. No one can own anyone else when
everyone possesses free will. Remember , children have minds of their own
too. Parents somehow have come to believe that their children owe them
something just for being parents. Y ou see children in a family being coerced
into having the same religion, ethnic beliefs and prejudices, educational
objectives, and the like. Parents somehow believe that membership in a
family precludes thinking as an individual. They are surprised when young
people want to be unique. They are often upset when their of fspring want to
marry outside of their own kind (whatever that is). They attempt to regulate,
teach, and condition their children’ s thinking, and it doesn’ t work. The
parents know it doesn’ t work, yet they carry on the battle and are forever
upset and frustrated. It seems to me that the business of parenting ought to
be to teach young people to be their own parents. For get this business of
family and parental obligations. Parenthood means raising children to think
for themselves, by providing examples worth emulating. I would ask all
parents to think back to how much they resisted, and still do, being owned
by their own parents. I would also tell them to place their parenting
emphasis on quality , ethics, integrity , knowledge, and serenity , and not the
opposites, which I’ve discussed already .”
“And what do you see as the role of discipline?” I asked her . “The only worthy discipline is self-discipline. It is the ability to
discipline oneself for full self-awareness and self-expression. Early in life a
child needs a firm model to provide an environment in which to learn to
internalize behavior , which is conducive to healthy self-management. Thechild needs to experience what will and will not be tolerated. All discipline
of young children should be aimed at teaching self-discipline. If children
learn only because they are told to do something, they soon become ‘doing-
as-they’re-told’ people. This is simply programming for incorrect thinkers
and unfulfilled adults. In other words, parents need to model for them, and
encourage them to discipline themselves, so that they have no need to rely
on others for control.”
“What have you observed about marriage as it is practiced here?” I asked
Eykis. “Marriage seems to be almost identical to parenting. It is invaded by the
same incorrect thinking. That is why so many marriages end. Y ou seem so
determined in your quest for ownership that you even pursue it with your
spouses. People who marry begin to think for each other . They impose
expectations on each other , and this is intolerable to both partners because
you are blessed with free will. Being an emotional or thought servant to
another will be accepted for only a brief period of time here on Earth. Then
the person who feels buried by the partner ’s ‘thinking for two’ simply
refuses to continue and the relationship breaks down. In marriages that
work, there is no incorrect thinking, no false assumption that one person has
a right to think for another . As you know , on Uranus we have a reason for
such behavior with our dependency-diodes and the like. That is our reality . But here you have no reality-based reasons for such conduct, and when
dependency thinking surfaces, even in small doses, your marriages end, and
remember , a marriage can end with or without divorce. Clean up the
erroneous thinking and you will preserve your institution of marriage. Perpetuate it, and marriage will eventually disappear on your planet.”
“Do you think there is any such thing as truth  here on Earth?” I wanted to
know . “There are unlimited truths on your planet, and they are all located in
individuals. If you ask thirty people on the beach why this is a beautiful
day, or is it too hot, you will get thirty dif ferent truthful  answers. One will
feel the day is beautiful because the sun is shining and it’ s warm, another
will feel that it is a terrible day because of the same conditions. Both are
truthful answers. On Earth, truth is an inner experience, yet many attempt to
impose their truths on others without ever stopping to think about separate
truths. Each person has an opportunity to view his world as he chooses. What is true for one is not true for another . When you allow for separatetruths, you no longer need agreements about what is true. In fact, it is only
when you attempt to or ganize a truth that it becomes a lie. V ery few of the
people on Earth whom I’ve observed are willing to accept another ’s truths
as valid when they conflict with their own, or with the accepted
‘organization’ of a truth.”
“You’ve mentioned changing our thinking as if it were something easy to
do. How does one just change one’ s thinking?” I asked. “You simply do it. For example, if I ask you to close your eyes and think
of a brown cocker -spaniel puppy on a blue chair , you can do that. Then if I
ask you to send that thought away and replace it with the thought of a green
vase of twelve long-stemmed red roses, you could also do that. Can you tell
me how you did it? Of course no one can say how it’ s done, but you all
know how to change your thoughts. For get the how and do it. W ork at
sending away any thought that you don’ t want or that is incorrect. This is
the beauty of your reality , you can think as you choose.”
“What are your thoughts on psychiatry and psychology as they are
practiced here?” I asked. “Most of it is practiced by people who are trapped by the same incorrect
thinking as those who seek the treatment. Most of your therapists (I thought
that word was ‘the rapist’ the first time I encountered it) seem content to
provide their clients with excuses for their own self-inflicted maladies. Y our
reality gives you a free will for a lifetime, yet you have professionals who
convince their clients and each other of various theories which place blame
on everything from the unconscious to birth order , to childhood traumas, to
parental errors, or anything else that’ s convenient. Therapy seems to be an
attempt by people to ‘purchase friendship,’ and an ef fort to gain self-
understanding by looking backward. A person who practices this incorrect
thinking of blaming others for his problems is simply transferring that
blame when he looks to a therapist for the answers. The truly skilled
therapists whom I observed provided an environment for self-discovery . They helped individual clients assume responsibility for everything and
accept the fact that they alone were responsible for everything that
happened to them.
_OceanofPDF.com_Gifts_from_Eykis_-_Wayne_W_Dyer.txt
Summarize the following text section accurately and concisely. Maintain specific details and numerical information, and use anti-repetition mechanisms:

        People just think incorrectly and raise their
offspring to do precisely the same. ”
“But it isn’ t all bad. Don’ t you think that industrialization has raised the
standard of living around the world. ” I protested. “I didn’ t say that working and money were bad. If you recall, I said that
the way it’ s perceived and utilized in your world is the problem. I support
working as a high-level way to live your life and feel worthy at the same
time. But your question also presupposes a truth that simply does not exist
in your reality—that the industrialized world is better than the
nonindustrialized world. If you look at it realistically, for every higher
standard of living of which you boast, there are expensive prices to pay. If
you improve transportation, you pollute the air. If you build great factories
you fill your world with carcinogens. If you build great weapons you
prepare to destroy your world in a conflagration that is too evil to
contemplate. “In those ‘uncivilized’ places where living standards are so low, people
don’t carry guns or die of cancer. While they can’ t move about as freely as
others, they don’ t breathe and drink industrial waste. They live on their land
rather than storing nuclear weapons on it. They’re close to their loved ones
and don’ t need to drink liquor to get through their day. In reality, a higher
standard of living is a businessman’ s justification for almost everything he
does, and yet when he is most honest with himself, he will say, ‘We were
happiest in the days when we had very little. W e genuinely loved each other
when our goals were only dreams. Sharing them brought us closer together. The lean years of fered so little in the way of externals that we had to turn
inward. ’ And that is the nature of happiness. Y ou see, all your suf fering
comes from craving and desire. When you stop to simply live and enjoy,
suffering also diminishes. Don’ t be too quick to jump to the conclusion that
those ‘uncivilized’ folks with lower living standards have a corner on
misery and an absence of fulfillment and happiness. In fact, you have muchto learn from each other. Instead of defending your great monetary profit
system, which needs no defense, since it works well, look to what you are
doing with it, what you believe it holds for you in the way of happiness. If
you can’ t be just as happy working in your garden as you are in a fancy
night club or working out a business deal, then you’ve yet to understand
that basic truth of your Earthly reality. That is, as I said before, there is no
way to happiness, happiness is the way. ”
We had completed two intense discussions and Eykis was as relaxed now
as she had been an hour earlier. It was no ef fort for her to be honest. She
was just as at home talking about religion or management as a kid at a
picnic. She was natural, expressive, and willing to sample anything that was
offered. There was no need for her to try to impress with her vocabulary or
cite statistical evidence for her assertions. She didn’ t have to quote scholars
to buttress her viewpoints. She was her own kind of expert. I moved to the next subject, introducing myself as a leading educator. I
asked her about educational practices on Uranus, and what she had
observed of educational attitudes and institutions on Earth. “How do you view our educational practices, Eykis. ” I asked, making it
as open-ended a beginning as possible. “The most alarming thing to me about your entire formal educational
system is the huge gap between what you say you’re doing and what is
actually being done. In virtually all your administrative statements about
education, you declare that your purpose is to encourage individual
thinking, self-actualization, an opportunity for each child to maximize his
potential as a free-thinking person. But I’ve not seen any practices that
carry out these lofty objectives,” she said. “Where do you see evidence of this gap. ”
“In almost all your schools. Every time young people seem to be
displaying any creative or free-thinking qualities, they are perceived as
threats and instantly squelched. Few teachers can stand a child who asks,
‘Why. ’ Y our educational rewards are doled out to those who conform the
best, to those who please their teachers or do their assignments quickly and
neatly. There are few rewards for independent thinking; in fact in most
instances it appears to be punished. A child who is truly independent of the
need for approval, who shows no signs of guilt or anxiety about it, is
considered a troublemaker. A child who refuses to be just like everybody
else is singled out and asked to feel guilty and repent. Y et these qualities ofbeing guilt-free, independent, and free thinking are what you label as no-
limit or self-actualized behaviors. Again, it just seems unreal to me to find
you stating one thing as an educational objective and doing exactly the
opposite. ”
“But children need to be disciplined first so that they can later make free,
independent judgments. That’ s why we stress doing it right, or the
‘teacher ’s way. ’ Besides, if everyone did whatever he wanted, there would
be no discipline and it would be literally impossible to teach a class,” I
stated in my best “educationese. ”
“I find it impossible to imagine how a child can learn to be a free thinker
by being trained for the opposite. It would be like training someone to be a
great runner by forcing him to sit down all his life. A classroom in which
children are all busily pursuing individual objectives isn’ t necessarily a
chaotic one. It could be one in which there’ s excitement, instead of the
apathy I noted in virtually every classroom on your planet. Individuals
could be helping each other in classrooms. They could have busy, creative
arenas, a miniature real world if you will, for exploring any subject at all. Instead, students are told to sit in their assigned seats and quietly do as
they’re told. This leads straight to the incorrect, neurotic thinking we have
discussed. ”
“Do you feel that an entire classroom sitting quietly is not a proper
learning environment. ”
“It’s not a question of proper or improper environment. It simply is not a
learning environment. Y ou know each person in your world is unique and
special. How can you tap that uniqueness when each child is treated the
same way. ” she asked me. “But I don’ t see how that is being done in our classrooms on Earth,” I
protested. “Well, here’ s what I observed. On Monday a teacher introduces a new
subject, Egyptian history, say. The teacher gives the same material to every
student. They are all exposed to the same lecture and discussion, they all
read the same book, they all do the same homework assignments, and on
Friday they are all given the same tests. Do you follow and agree so far. ”
she asked. “Yes, yes, go on,” I said. “The students who perform best on the test are given an A, those who
‘pass’ receive a C or a D, and some fail. There are no provisions for thoseindividual dif ferences that are an integral part of your reality. Why is it
assumed that everyone will assimilate such information at the same rate. Why is the student who got only half the answers correct because he may
need two weeks to learn the material punished with a low grade. Why
should they all be expected to perform at exactly the same rate. What about
the students who need only a day to master Egyptian history but need
fifteen days for long division. Why are they forced to sit there quietly
listening to material they’ve already mastered. I’ll tell you why if you’re
interested. ”
“Please do,” I said. “The answer is, you treat them all the same. Y ou teach them all the same
way, in the same amount of time, and call those who can learn exactly that
way the fastest, the smartest. In my reality, being able to assimilate
something faster than someone else has to do with one thing, speed. Y our
educational logic guarantees there will always be average and below
average students. Y ou insist that everyone conform to a standard norm. Y ou
teach all your young people to think and act alike. But what do you have to
offer your world if you are just like everybody else. Y ou insure this through
the insane pursuit of grades, those educational merit badges you dispense
on report cards and transcripts. These are the real obsession of educators on
Earth—not knowledge and self-discovery, but the pursuit of those external
rewards called grades. Moreover, these grades that you’ve elevated to this
almighty status have absolutely nothing to do with being educated in
reality,” she declared hotly. This seemed to be an area that Urantians felt
very strongly about. “But what’ s wrong with providing rewards in the form of grades for
educational excellence. ” I asked. “Grades and knowledge are mutually exclusive ideas. In fact, grades
actually serve to lower motivation for knowledge,” she replied. “Why are they mutually exclusive.
The author believes that craving and desire are the root of suffering, and that people can choose to stop craving and find happiness by living in the present moment.
What does the author believe is the root of suffering?
According to Eykis, the main issue with the education system is that it rewards conformity rather than individuality, and that it perpetuates a culture of competition and external validation.
What is the main issue with the education system on Earth, according to Eykis?
The author believes that doctors are not healers, but rather people who perpetuate a culture of dependency and external validation. They focus on treating symptoms rather than addressing the root causes of illness.
What is the author's opinion on the role of doctors in the medical profession?
According to Eykis, the main issue with governments is that they prioritize power and control over the well-being of the people, and that they are not responsive to the needs of the people.
What is the main issue with governments on Earth, according to Eykis?
The author believes that parents should focus on teaching children to be their own parents, rather than trying to control or own them.
What is the author's view on the role of parents in raising children?