Those who are obsessed with domination, control, and/or supremacy have these things as their top priority in life. It's the filter they look at the whole world through. Since they don't know it's a filter, they tend to think they are seeing reality, and that anyone who does not see the world in the same way is either just "wrong", or is "stupid". Depending on their emotional profile, they may even feel that they are being attacked and insulted when someone's information and point of view does not align with theirs.
Those who are red-green colorblind, for example, would never know that what they see is not the full range of colors, unless someone else told them. Those who see less color than that would also not know that the world actually has more colors than they can see. So if someone pointed to a traffic light one day and described the color of each light, the colorblind person would just think they were stupid or crazy, because he or she does not SEE those colors.
The reason we even know about colorblindness is because some humans have the ability to communicate observations without ego. So instead of arguing about what colors are actually THERE, some objective humans got together and compared what they saw, and then started experimenting to find out more. Instead of countering and trying to prove who was "right", they simply communicated in humility with each other. They didn't worry or fight over who was "right", they knew they were ALL "right", and ALL "wrong" at the same time, and that not a single one of them was superior or inferior to another as whole persons.
They were not in "hierarchy" or "status" where one person is "always right" and tells the others what to think and what to see, but without that, as peers, as persons, telling what THEY EACH see, as individuals, and then comparing all of the information regardless of WHO said WHAT.
The person who sees green is not "better than" the person who doesn't see green, they're not innately superior because they can see green. They can see green, and that's all there is to that, it doesn't mean anything else about them as a person. Making their ability to see green into something bigger than it is would simply be about their DESIRE to be superior to others; it doesn't make it true.
What that does, however, is wreck their ability to remain objective, logical, humble, and scientific. Logic and objectivity can not exist under the umbrella of desiring superiority, control, and supremacy, or under the umbrella of assessing other humans as either superior or inferior. Logic has no desire, control, 'authority', power, or ego within it. It's completely objective. As soon as logic is touched by the ego, it's no longer. Logic requires humility to exist in a human, and humility is hard for humans in general, and nearly impossible for those who seek and desire control and superiority.
That's why "scientific method" was created, in order to get around "confirmation bias" and the like, although it's not foolproof; many humans still find a way to skew their own scientific results in favor of their beliefs.
(Confirmation bias is when a person sees something as proof of the beliefs they already have, instead of seeing what's actually there, or being aware that they can't see all of the information.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Those who are red-green colorblind, for example, would never know that what they see is not the full range of colors, unless someone else told them. Those who see less color than that would also not know that the world actually has more colors than they can see. So if someone pointed to a traffic light one day and described the color of each light, the colorblind person would just think they were stupid or crazy, because he or she does not SEE those colors.
The reason we even know about colorblindness is because some humans have the ability to communicate observations without ego. So instead of arguing about what colors are actually THERE, some objective humans got together and compared what they saw, and then started experimenting to find out more. Instead of countering and trying to prove who was "right", they simply communicated in humility with each other. They didn't worry or fight over who was "right", they knew they were ALL "right", and ALL "wrong" at the same time, and that not a single one of them was superior or inferior to another as whole persons.
They were not in "hierarchy" or "status" where one person is "always right" and tells the others what to think and what to see, but without that, as peers, as persons, telling what THEY EACH see, as individuals, and then comparing all of the information regardless of WHO said WHAT.
The person who sees green is not "better than" the person who doesn't see green, they're not innately superior because they can see green. They can see green, and that's all there is to that, it doesn't mean anything else about them as a person. Making their ability to see green into something bigger than it is would simply be about their DESIRE to be superior to others; it doesn't make it true.
What that does, however, is wreck their ability to remain objective, logical, humble, and scientific. Logic and objectivity can not exist under the umbrella of desiring superiority, control, and supremacy, or under the umbrella of assessing other humans as either superior or inferior. Logic has no desire, control, 'authority', power, or ego within it. It's completely objective. As soon as logic is touched by the ego, it's no longer. Logic requires humility to exist in a human, and humility is hard for humans in general, and nearly impossible for those who seek and desire control and superiority.
That's why "scientific method" was created, in order to get around "confirmation bias" and the like, although it's not foolproof; many humans still find a way to skew their own scientific results in favor of their beliefs.
(Confirmation bias is when a person sees something as proof of the beliefs they already have, instead of seeing what's actually there, or being aware that they can't see all of the information.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
