“I share the belief of many of my contemporaries that the spiritual crisis pervading all spheres of Western industrial society can be remedied only by a change in our world view. We shall have to shift from the materialistic, dualistic belief that people and their environment are separate, toward a new conciousness of an all-encompassing reality, which embraces the experiencing ego, a reality in which people feel their oneness with animate nature and all of creation.”

Hogwash!

Sounds reasonable to me.

Very insightful, Tammy. Dr. Hoffman is right - modern peoples need to discard the old dogmas and embrace a new way of viewing our world.

That's....OK. Maybe if you could translate it into easier and faster words so more people can understand.... Not everyone is as smart as you. I didn't understand much. :(

What else is there to say? The man was a fine scientist and an extraordinary human being. Journey well Dr. Hoffman, thanks for everything.

... the people did not have a vote to charge these representatives with a particular duty; the states gave these representatives this charge. This does not, however, establish a rule of elitists. The colonies considered themselves states long before the Constitution was created; in fact, it was because of this strong sense of statehood that it took so long for the constitution to even be ratified. Americans today have a little different understanding of statehood than does the rest of the world (or our founders did). Most Americans perceive a state to be more along the lines of a province or subservient geographic area. A state, however, is defined as a specified geographic area with a political and sovereign politically governing body. The key word here is "sovereign." Each state, during the ratification of the Constitution, considered itself as sovereign and separate from each other state as currently Great Britain does from Japan. Before the Constitution, varying states even had their own currency! Each ambassador was appointed to the conference by the state to represent that state in what was considered an international affair. The collection of states under a single system of government is called "federalism," wherein each state freely agrees to delegate certain characteristics of its sovereignty to a higher power. So, as an example, consider if this were done today: If Germany were to enter into supranational federalism with France or Italy, wouldn't Germany want to make sure that its citizens would be protected against the vested interests of France or Italy in such a federalist alliance? If France and Italy wanted to implement an economic model that would destroy Germany's ability to produce its natural resources, wouldn't you think there should be a provision that would allow Germany to veto such a bill, even though it was in the minority in this federalist alliance? Or, what if Germany and France wanted to pass federalist legislation that would directly incapacitate the ability of the individuals in Italy to make a living; wouldn't you think there should be a power provided to veto such a bill, even though Italy was in the minority? Is it just to destroy the livelihood of Italy because Germany and France thought it was a good idea for their own economy? Democracy says, "no, there should be no exceptions, it's majority rule all of the time, absolutely." A Republic (as established by the founders of the Constitution (Article 4, Section 4)), agrees that it is not justifiable for France or Germany to pass legislation that would directly injure the individuals in Italy, or that France and Italy could pass legislation that would harm Germany's economy in production. This does not set up an "elitist" society, but a justifiable society that rules on the will of the majority while also protecting the rights of the minority. The ambassadors of the states to the federalist society are called "Senators" in our Constitution; however, the authors of the Constitution also thought it necessary to also carry the voice of the people to the federalist level; hence, they created the "House of Representatives," that was chosen directly by the people. This is clearly obvious when you study the "great compromise" of the Constitutional Convention. The Constitution originally arranged for the President to be elected by varied means other than by direct vote of the people. The power, in every way, still rested within the people themselves, because the people voted for their state representatives that in turn also voted for the Senate and the . If a federalist law infringes upon the sovereignty of the states or the inalienable rights of the people, then the federal government has no ability act--regardless of what the ruling majority desires

We shall have to shift from the materialistic, dualistic belief that people and their environment are separate, toward a new conciousness of an all-encompassing reality, which embraces the experiencing ego, a reality in which people feel their oneness with animate nature and all of creation of our all mighty

So true.

it was a comprehensive review of all performance areas (machine, worker, environment) to ensure pro-active, continuous improvement in safe sucess at all levels.

inspiring.

Mind Boggling invention. Its indeed an amazing quote. Cheers ****************

This quote is great and Tammy from Miami should suck twelve cocks. Albert Hoffman was a great chap just like Kurt Vonnegut.