The Jews and their Deceits

A great leader and a revolutionary man Adolf Hitler was. Although many consider him as the most evil man in the 20th century, he has proven him self to be a great leader and his vision of racial supremacy.This article talks about his ideas about the Jewish people and the reason for the mass genocide of Jews during the second world war. After reading this article, i can understand why Hitler despise Jews so much. In the article he said that the Jews are master of concealing their true intention when it come to obtaining power and credit. the Jews learn to hide their thought and telling us what we wanted to here. so it seems that the Jews are wearing masks.

The Jews are pulling a shroud over our eyes in order to distract us so they can take what they desire.

In this modern era, we can see that The Jews are still up to their old tricks.For years now the Israeli have been oppressing the people of Palestine.They push the Palestine out of their land and claim the land as their own.

In my opinion, during the second world war, many powers of the world fail to realize this behavior of the Jews and even now they are still blinded by the Jews tricks.

In the article, Adolf Hitler labeled the Jews as leeches. It is only fitting that the Jews are refer in that manner as they behave like parasite. in the article, Hitler said that the Jews would use wisdom and knowledge of other people to further their own cause.in Germany before the war, Jews would take Germans with the skills and creativity that the Jews lacked, to come to work for them.They will find a way a way to take our work and make it their own.

This article makes me have second thought about the cruelty of Adolf Hitler during his reign. although i agree that genocide is never right even to our greatest enemy, i can understand what was in Hitlers mind during the war. Adolf Hitler saw the true behavior of the Jews and did what he thought was right. 

the degree of happiness

I find this article written by Betard Russell very interesting. by reading the article, i am able to understand what Russell is trying to convey which is happiness has two different side.the two sort of happiness is one that is open to any human being and the other one is specifically only for those who can read or write.The happiness that is for any human being means that one does not depend on intellectual source or even need to be based natural law beliefs or any of the fad, fashion and creeds that these who are intellectual need in order tho be happy.In other words, one does not need to be intelligent to be happy. I can see this in many people in the world especially the indigenous tribe of the world.They do not have the knowhow to create advance technology but there are still happy with their traditional way of life.

The other type of happiness if based on intelligence as the road to happiness.According the Russell, these people during 1872, the scientist or people of science were happier compare to artist.The reason for this is that people of science are emotionally simple and are satisfy with their work so they can derive pleasure from eating and even marrying.when i think about it it still make sense as in the modern world, those who have high education and are intellectual are usually more happy due to their wealth and success.But in Russell's time, artist have more complex emotional.Therefore it is harder for them to find pleasure in their work.

Goleman's "theory" of mind

Two Brains Equals Two Minds Because Goleman's "theory" of mind is based strictly on his interpretations of data from brain research, he comes to some questionable conclusions about the mind. If there is a good reason to think of the human mind having "two brains" or "two minds," then it is to delineate the difference between our egocentric drives (with accompanying egocentric thoughts and emotions) and our rational drives (with accompanying rational thoughts and emotions). Goleman says that the emotional mind is quicker than the rational, or thinking mind, springing into action without pausing even a moment to consider what it is doing.

Equating the "Thinking Mind" with the "Rational Mind" Because of Goleman's initial distinction between the "Thinking Mind" and the "Emotional Mind," he is led into a number of problems, as I have suggested. A more realistic theory of mind would thus delineate not the "emotional mind" from the "rational mind," but the "rational mind" (with its related emotional component) and the "irrational mind" (with its related emotional component). On the other hand, Goleman states, "Our emotions have a mind of their own, one which can hold views quite independently of our rational mind ."

This statement seems to mean that emotions can somehow think for themselves, rather than that the emotional mind uses the thinking mind (which, remember Goleman equates with the "rational mind") to serve its purposes. ," we are unclear as to whether, in Goleman's view, the emotional mind thinks for itself, or whether it uses the thinking mind to think for it. It seems to me that Goleman's concept of "emotional hijacking" implies that when we experience highly intense emotions, those emotions drive our thinking (or lead us to action prior to thinking). Most importantly, we must come to terms with those truths about the human mind that enable us to begin the process of taking charge of our minds: that thoughts and emotions are inextricably bound, that we have both egocentric and rational tendencies, that our inner conflicts are never best understood as a simple matter between emotion and reason, that self-command of mind takes both extended education and self-discipline, that our fullest rational development is dependent on the development of rational affect, that to bring intelligence to bear upon emotions we must take charge of the thinking underlying those emotions.