Quotessence
Home / Authors / Elmar Hussein Biography

Elmar Hussein Biography

Author

Related Quotes

“Not depending on external gentleness and kindliness, one of the fundamental differences between male and female personalities is that the former tends to 'break' the opposite sex, but the latter to be broken by him. Male and female brains are designed to get pleasure from that breaking and being broken, respectively, within some acceptable limits. The more self-confident and stubborn a woman, the more intense unconscious desire to be broken by some aggressive and chauvinistic male intervention once. Not depending on how she would like to have the air of self-assured confidence, nothing could prevent her from dreaming of getting a hidden pleasure from it.”

“If you are thought to be a good person, it means that you are weak. If you are thought to be a bad person, it doesn't mean that you are a strong person. Rather, it would mean that you are unpleasant for everyone. Be unpredictable, neither good nor bad. Let them think of you as a good person with whom everyone should be careful while communicating, because you can be dangerous if you aren't treated properly.”

“I used to disbelieve in fate, but now I realize that it exists. I still do not believe that it is written, in somewhere, by a supernatural being. This is our brain, our fate is hidden in our brain. We cannot do anything in the strict sense of the term, our brain does it instead of us. Our brain automatically decides, for example, when and with whom we are going to fall in love; what we are going to seek in life in order to give some meaning to our life and feel somehow personal happiness. We can only be aware of a small part of these complex processes. Just our brain determines our fate, we cannot choose our brain, that is, its design, the proportion of concrete locations there, its functional activity level, etc. This is absolutely impossible, we are only born with it unwillingly. In that context, our fate had already been determined before we were born. Trying to change the fate means trying to change the design of the brain.”

“I am not a feminist, because, in my opinion, this is a political ideology. I am a humanist, and I care about the problems of all mankind, and I wonder how these problems can be solved by scientific methods. In this case, I am a positivist, that is, I think that functional dynamics in a social system can be supported by a rational design, taken in a certain space-time continuum, but not by abstract metaphysical concepts, such as freedom, equality, and so on. If we consider humanism as a whole system, then feminism will be its subsystem. If the whole system - all of humanity is in prosperity, then all its subsystems will be a satisfactory condition for this. If our attention is concentrated solely on a specific subsystem, then we can now relatively regenerate it due to the degeneration of the entire system in the long term.”

“Anti-feminism is not sexism. It does not defend the various types of physical, sexual and moral violence against women in the family and society. It does not claim to violate the natural rights of women, which is expressed in the constitution and the legal system as a whole. Instead, anti-feminism supports the innate biological differences among men and women, and as a final result it is directed against gender-blindness -- a unisex trend that artificially increases due to feminism in modern global civilization. To protect the natural rights of women, you don't need to be a feminist, you have to be a humanist who has devoted himself or herself to protecting all humans.”

“The native land begins with a nation -- an ethnic group, the group of inhabitants of the land. Only the love of humans who share the same social environment with you can lead to sincere patriotism -- the love of the native land. The love of land -- a material object -- is somehow idolatry, while the love of humans is humanism. Always practice sensitivity and empathy, and one day you will become a patriot, as well as a humanist.”

“Why do we tend to consider ourselves happier than homeless people? If there is no money, no gold, no private property, no marriage, no religion, no government, maybe there is no reason to trouble about anything, which in turn can save human life from the unnecessary anxiety associated with them. Anxiety comes mainly from the connection to external world. If you have got nothing of value in the external world, you will have no fear of losing anything there. If there is no fear, there is no reason to be unhappy and there are more reasons to enjoy just the existence of yourself.”

“The ultimate cause of human suffering is based on the internal structure of the mind. All causes of the discomfort and distress mainly come from the inner world. Given that the human brain is a necessary and sufficient cause of the human mind, in general, a person should begin with a reconfiguration of the brain if he or she wants to avoid all the sufferings in life. Remember that the brain is the ultimate cure for all suffering.”

“The cause of your suffering is based on the internal structure of your mind -- all the causes of your discomfort and distress originate from the inner world, and not from the outer world. Given the fact that the human brain is a necessary and proximate sufficient cause of the human mind, in general, start with the re-arrangement of your brain activity, if you want to avoid all the suffering in your life. Remember, your brain is the ultimate cure for your suffering, as well as its ultimate cause.”

“İf you associate the Self with the control over feeling, perception, consciousness (subjective awareness), or something else, in short, what is going on inside your brain, it would mean that the Self doesn’t exist, because it cannot control none of the aforementioned mental states. All of them are automatically controlled by the brain but not by the Self. None of them is permanent, all are mutable, constantly changing the appearences in accordance with bio-chemical changes in the brain. For instance, in most cases, if not all, it is impossible to pre-arrange what to feel or how to perceive, all of them are automatically realized by the brain. A person cannot deliberately identify which part of information should be on a conscious level, which part should be on unconscious level of the mind, considering that more than 90% of all information is hidden from the consciousness and for that reason a person is simply not aware of what is really happening inside the brain and mind. That is why it is said that the vast majority of humans are merely a bio-social robot without any self that can assume some real control of anything in life. With regard to them, the Self is an illusion, a kind of metaphoric figure.”

“İf you identify yourself (your Self) with your feeling, perception, mental image of your body, consciousness (subjective awareness), in short, what is going inside your brain, it would mean that your self doesn’t exist, because it cannot control none of them. All of them are automatically controlled by your brain but not by your self. None of them are permanent, all are mutable. You cannot determine what to feel or how to perceive, your brain automatically does it for you, you cannot stop the change of your body image because of aging and you cannot control which part of information should be on conscious, which should be on unconscious level of your mind, considering that more than 90% of all information is hidden from your conscious mind and you are simply not aware what is going inside your brain. That is why it is said that you are merely a bio-social robot without any self being capable of taking control of anything in your life. Your self can control almost nothing.”

“Most men are merely bio-social robots that think and act in an automatic way. Their natural ‘micro-scheme’ — brain under the influence of genetic coding and constant hormone surge determines the biological destiny of them. İn addition, being unwillingly born in certain social circumstances — from society, in general up to family, in particular -- there is no other destiny which can determine the future of a bio-social robot. In order to transform from social bio-robot to a conscious human being, in the strict sense of term, you should cultivate yourself -- your brain and mind through meditation. Meditation is not worship, or any spiritual act; it is rather mindfulness and concentration on your thought, desires and memory, most part of which is hidden in the unconscious mind. Meditation is an introspection, you can also realize it by doing science and acquiring knowledge that would enable you to better understand your mind and brain. Meditation is a means of reorganization of the brain design and redirection of its neurochemical activity, which in turn means the change of the biological destiny. God, or nature creates only a bio-social robot, it depends on you whether to become a human being, who is capable of getting to the bottom of his mind and brain, or not.”

“No beautiful face can have serious intellectual expression. ‘Beauty, real beauty, ends where an intellectual expression begins. Intellect is in itself a mode of exaggeration, and destroys the harmony of any face. The moment one sits down to think, one becomes all nose, or all forehead, or something horrid’, as accurately describes Oscar Wilde in his ‘The Picture of Dorian Gray’. That is why you are unlikely to ever meet a beautiful intellectual woman; whenever she is beautiful, she is not so intellectual, and vice versa, when she is intellectual, she is not so beautiful.”

“What is the use of religion in the modern world? In my mind, religion can be of no use for any intellectual in the sense what is directly written there. Whatever literally means in religion can independently be thought by the rational mind, of course, if there is any need to think over such mythology. Most of what rational mind can obtain in scientific way cannot even be discernible by religious thinking. There is no need to emphasize that the fundamental base of the modern world is out of the province of religious thinking. The language of religion itself is out of date. The whole description of afterdeath, for example, seems trivial nowadays. Imagine that afterdeath you go to pass the examination of ‘goodness’ or ‘badness’ before the Holy Spirit as it is shown in religion. He asks what you have done in so-and-so time and space, and you answer miraculously remembering every detail in your life, fully visualizing everything before your eyes. Nothing can be forgotten, nothing can be hidden. I don’t claim, whether it is true or false, at least here and now, I want to emphasize the fact that the language of such description is out of date. Considering that the history of religion and the Holy Scripture goes back long, long before the emergence of the modern world, it is explainable. Whatever is written there coincides with pre-modern world thinking. For instance, if a religion emerged nowadays, its Holy Scripture would contain concepts and ideas according to modern world thinking. There would be no need for questioning you by the Holy Spirit. In my eyes, there would be rather a description of the computer lab with ‘angels’ sitting at the computer and checking your memory-card in which is written all information about your life. The brain, which can pass the examination of ‘goodness’ would be connected to ‘heaven’ program system, which in turn would send to that brain positive signal as if your body is really experiencing sexual or other kind of pleasures as it is described in religion. Similarly, if you brain fails in that examination, it would be connected to ‘hell’ program system sending to your brain negative signals as if your body is really undergoing the punishment known by religion. So can modern religion be of the modern age. The human mind can never entirely grasp what would happen after death, so why should you poison your mind with mythology from ages past?”

“Never regret not being able to realize certain things in your life. You are who you are now, partly because of these things, and if you are satisfied with your existence now, there is no need to feel sad about past. Maybe even a small difference in the past could make you feel displeased now. The same is true with regard to the future. You are going to be someone, partly because you cannot achieve all of your goals now, and nobody can know if these achievement can make us happy or cause suffering in the future.”

“Thoughts are the propositions of internal language, and reasoning involves a possible combination of the content of these propositions. Religion supports you with one, science another content of the same object in terms of various symbols. Their symbols are different, in most cases inconsistent. The combinational power of symbols, as well as their capacity to represent objects in external world is not intrinsic features of the symbols on their own. The symbols on paper gain these capacities in virtue of a human agent, whose brain gives them some meanings. Related to science, this fact is obvious and doubtless, because science is considered, unequivocally, to be a production of the brain so that if the brain design was different in all humans, the vision that science offers would be different, too. Considering it, it can be said that there is a correlation between science and brain design. However, in relation to religion, it can be contestable to claim the existence such a correlation, because religion pretends to express only divine will and insists on having less or no connection with subjective brain experiences. At this point emerges one of the major differences between science and religion with regard to the truth. Neither science nor religion can provide definitely clear vision of reality, both of them comprise some distorted truth, however, it is possible to trace back only to the origin of scientific 'distortion', following the way of correlation between science and brain design.”

“Some feminists are really very interesting people. Science cannot unambiguously clarify which one — nature or nurture— fundamentally determines personality traits and human behavior, but some feminist movements already distinguish sex (biological factors) from gender (social factors), insisting that social cultivation can significantly modify social roles and behavior patterns and radically change the perception of traditional masculinity and femininity in the social system. In fact, without reliable scientific verification of the relationship between nature and nurture in the predestination of future human life, they offer a firm ready-made belief in changing this life with education and upbringing. And this is one of the essential differences between science and political ideology, which also includes feminism among others.”

“Sex and love with robots. A bit amazing, fantastic, inconceivable, nevertheless, imaginable and scientifically explainable. Nowadays you can disclaim this idea because of a scientific fiction, but you cannot argue that it is completely incredible and contradicts human sexuality and romantic experience. As it is known, whatever you experience, you experience due to what is going on in the brain. Your physical contact with the partner’s body is nothing more than merely a physiological act, sending signals to the brain. Without the signals that cause neurochemical activity in the brain, your sexual contact cannot give you any sexual experience on its own. Your brain has been automatically programmed before this contact concerning which kind of natural design of the partner’s body can send more intense signals to your brain, which, in turn, enable it to experience stronger sexual pleasure. The direct cause of your sexual experience is your brain program, your sexual partner’s body, from which you derive sexual pleasure, is just indirect cause of it. Orgasm occurs in the brain, but not in any part of the body. Now imagine higher technological progress than ours. High bioengineering allows us to construct artificial robots similar to us — which have artificial ‘flesh and blood’ that is indistinguishable by your sense organs. When you get in physical contact with her ‘body’, your brain program could discern nothing artificial there. The same input signals, as if there is nothing artificial, and the brain would automatically begin to satisfy its sexual desires. However, there would be a fundamental difference — an artificial partner would exist absolutely adequate to your will. Visually, ‘she’ would be the living embodiment of your dreams. Neuroengineering would allow us to construct ‘her’ brain and through it also her conscious mind and personality, as you would like them to be. An ideal personality for you. It would be like that you say to do something and she would do, or you say don’t, and she wouldn’t. However, there wouldn’t be any direct control. You would control only her brain program, her unconscious and conscious mind, delete unwished episodes from her brain. She wouldn’t know that she is a robot, as you couldn’t know, if you were a robot. She would think that she is the same as you, having free will, being capable of thinking, feeling, expressing herself, controlling her behavior, and so on, and so forth. It would be possible to program her brain against leaving or killing you, so in that context you future would be guaranteed. The ideal personality, the ideal physical appearance — welcome to heaven, but only for those who have a lot of money. Unfortunately, even in the cyber-future, those who would be short of money would have to content themselves with biosocial robots in hell, as most of us do now.”

“You can never characterize anybody’s personality in detail. There should always be hidden and unknown aspects of any personality that can put you to confusion. However, you can nearly take it for guaranteed that if whoever is less talkative and sensitive, he/she is more aggressive and sadist by nature, because human brain is designed so that if cells in the communication and emotion centers there are killed off, the cells in the sex and aggression centers will grow. There is a proportion between these centers, which means that if one contains more neurons, the other does less. This negative personality trait can be hidden with the naked eye, but it exists in all probability.”

“One of more cruel punishment methods, if not the most cruel one, to any woman is to completely keep her out of attention, to constantly disconnect her eye connection, or simply not to listen to her. It could automatically destroy her Ego so badly that she could even prefer, from the bottom of her heart, any severe physical punishment to that ‘mild’ punishment, which would mean to be killed by inches for female brain.”

“It is a scientific fact that our perceptions are strongly influenced by our desires and motivations. When we are hungry, food-related words tend to grab our attention more than words that are not related to food. You can observe the similar situation related to sexual hunger. Until you cannot satisfy your sexual hunger, your attention will be focused on sexual thing more than normal. That is why conservative societies, which tend to suppress sexual drives, are more implicitly sex-oriented than are liberal societies, which tolerate them. Without any regard to severe suppression of sexuality, no society can reject the fact that sexual thoughts float through a man’s brain, on average, many times each day, and it has no connection with morality. The reason lies in the design of male brain, which devotes two and a half times to sexual drives in comparison with female brain. Total and complete covering of the female body and strict prohibition against emotional contact with her only trigger the sexual fantasy of the male brain, which, in turn, leads to sexual savagery and aggressiveness, making discomfort both for the person himself and for others.”

“The state of bliss is based on having pleasure, the basis of which is sexual pleasure. Without the regular sexual life, there cannot be a state of happiness. However, in sexual intercourse, the essential factor for getting sexual pleasure doesn't depend primarily on this sexual act in itself, but on the fact that the brain should be ready to experience this sexual pleasure -- the impulses receiving during sexual intercourse can rush to the pleasure center of the brain and trigger an orgasm. At this point, the functional state of the female brain, which is very sensitive to external factors, differs from the male brain. The sexual impulses in general can trigger an orgasm in sexual intercourse only if the fear and anxiety center of the brain has been deactivated. But this deactivation does not occur in a similar way in both genders. Neuropsychology says that before the fear and anxiety center has been turned off, in the female brain, any last minute worry -- even if about kids, or getting dinner on the table, not to mention the serious career-related anxiety -- can interrupt the march of sexual impulses toward orgasm. Unlike the female brain, male brain does not experience such difficulties associated with orgasm. For that reason, women in general may be less likely to be happy in social life than men. Perhaps, in some cases, the happy face of a career woman is simply a social mask for others.”

“It is not true that women think in illogical way -- the logical thinking apparatus is as appropriate for a female brain as it is for a male brain. However, there is a fundamental gender-based distinction in the functional system of this thinking apparatus: unlike male, female logic is based on fuzzy logic -- wherein each statement has got several values in such a way that if women say "No", this response doesn't mean absolute 'no-thing-ness', but implies some insensible and imperceptible features of the quite opposite response -- "Yes". The same is also true for a shift in the opposite direction of evaluation in female logic -- from "Yes" to "No". That is why it sometimes turns out to be a very difficult task to translate women's fuzzy logic to men's two-valued logic, that includes only "Yes" or "No", without a third value.”

“The fundamental difference between ideology, and its various forms, such as politics, history, religion, ethics, morality, and so on, and science is that the former just offers certain preferences to a person to think and to analyze the reality, but the latter urge a person to abandon all these preferences and neutralize the mind towards reality. Ideology can never be more than subjective valued judgment, but science must be free from this judgment. Ideology is intended for the masses with little, or no rational and analytical thinking, but science for intellectuals for whom rational thinking carries in itself a primary value. The masses can never engage in a genuine science, in similar way, no true intellectual can be an ideologist, because any ideological presupposition would deprive him of his rational and analytical thinking, or reduce it to a considerable extent. Free rational thinking on the base of empirical scientific facts often force you to go against various wide-spread forms of ideology with its all above-mentioned forms.”