NEW: (hypothetically starring) VIC REEVES as LUKE SKYWALKER .. in "Waiting for Godot, the hollywood version".
The key to science, according to Feynman.
Thrust of argument: In a lecture on The Character of Physical law (part 1), Feynman tells us: 'This is the key of modern science and is the beginning of the true understanding of nature. This idea - that to look at the thing, to record the details and to hope that in the information thus obtained may lie a clue to one or another of a possible theoretical intepretation'.
Direction of resistance / implied resistance: So for example to know what is going on in the world, instead of just reading the headlines and even largely short articles presented by the mainstream media, with huge adverts for huger corporations all around what you're reading and influencing the range of topics those sources are willing to 'dignify', one must look at every reasonable source possible.
I WOULD TRADE NOW ON:
bae (at half strength)
AT APPROX 552.50
capita (at half strength)
AT APPROX 465.90
centrica AT APPROX 144.80
g4s AT APPROX 252.60
gkn AT APPROX 300.80
glencore AT APPROX 349.00
m&s AT APPROX 310.60
morrison AT APPROX 211.80
rollsroyce (at half strength)
AT APPROX 832.50
rsa (at half strength)
AT APPROX 597.00
THIS IS NOT TRADING ADVICE. CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILS.
Removal of resistance: Some suggested authors and sources are listed on the page accessible via the link in the references below.
Unification: Why not go through the list and pick a few writers from it and go and read their works? It may help you to be a tiny bit more scientific about how you approach the modern world.
(TVhobo's estimated size of readership since 2013, mainly in the UK and USA, with Germany in third place:
over 200,000 readers across approximately 200 cities/towns)
previous point on the grid | next point on the grid
Click here to read about Shams Pirani, the editor and chief author on this grid - note, if you can actually prove anything written above wrong, I would gladly, if the proof is sufficient, correct what I've written and what I think - if I could, however, prove your attempted proof wrong, then I would accordingly say so and maintain whatever point of view is completely based on fact and proof.