: I had actually followed your response to Nikhil and discovered a definition of Critical Consciousness that I thought might appy to Frenchy's methods...but then I thought - why bother.
: Frenchy is very typical of those many (products of our educational system) who confuse opinion with actual research. One is very easy. The other very difficult. We are accustumed to taking the "easy" way. This is facilitated by being confronted such daily riviting questions as: "Should there be a license plate to honor Ronald Reagon"?
: This is a level of consciousness characterized by depth in the interpretation of problems, through testing one's own findings with openness to revision, attempting to avoid distortion when perceiving
: problems and preconceived notions when analyzing them, receptivity to the new without rejecting the old because it is old. In striving toward critical consciousness, the individual rejects passivity, practicing dialogue rather than polemics, and using permeable, interrogative, restless, and dialogical forms of life. Critical consciousness is brought about not through an individual or intellectual effort, but through collective struggle and praxis.
: ...but then I thought, why bother.
: The Link
Tell me about The Link.
If you must adhere to all the chapters and verses of the scientific method, research *is* difficult. Valid assertions can be made from an intuitive approach, though. Some folks may not be able to connect, or would rather dismiss than engage in discussion which obviously threatens long held belief. Many cannot connect with a conceptual offering merely because they have no experience with individual sovereignty -- (actually being free of obligation to controliacs). Discourse by email preferred. Everything is Natural.