Why I know, not hope

Hope is for pussies.001Hope is weak.

What you believe is larger than you (God, the Universe, the Force) ignores hope. Speak from know, it obeys. That thing larger than you is waiting for you to grow a pair. When you do, it  notices. Gets in step. Lines up behind you.

Know, don’t hope. Hope is veiled pessimism. When you hope, you’re blowing smoke.


“Know” is not faking it. To know is not the same as pretending, a la “The Secret”. Know means you have observed, understand and use upward and downward spirals and focus as described in physics, combined with your own natural skills and talent, to make something happen in the world.

I don’t Hope we’re changing the world at Copiosis. I know we are. That’s why we’re solving humanity’s most wicked problem. That’s why the one percent will change.

Hope is waste.

5 thoughts on “Why I know, not hope

  1. He said nothing about women being weak. Don’t troll on subjects like this. Faith is good to have, it shows trust in something bigger than ones’ self. Though for something such as Copiosis you need to believe in the facts, and faith is (by definition) belief without proof. For a system such as this, proof will be needed if it will ever come to be realized. In a world full of skeptics, faith will not be enough. Faith doesn’t work for the current system. Lots of people have faith in capitalism, they are the ones that rant against the 1%, the left and the right, blaming them for the loss of true capitalism. When in truth and with proof, it is the system itself that is corrupt. So what has faith done to help? However when knowledge is freely shared and improved upon, faith becomes obsolete because then you know. When you know there is no need for faith because the proof is before you.

    1. Erica, thank you for commenting on my comments. It’s always helpful for me to get some feedback on how I’ve been perceived. I did not intend to “troll” on Perry’s blog.

      I realize that Perry didn’t explicitly say that women were weak. However, I believe it is implied by his comments – and I know Perry well enough to believe, if he rereads, that he would agree that his comments were sexist. I also don’t believe that Perry is in support of the patriarchal paradigm. Did you notice the metaphor of militarism in his blog? “Gets in step.” “Lines up behind you.” “Speak from know, it obeys.” Perhaps it is different for you, but reading those phrases, I am reminded of my days in the army. It is important for military *commanders* to speak in a commanding voice, a voice that implies that the speaker KNOWS what needs to be done. Who would obey an uncertain voice? And in battle, an uncertain voice will not come from the type of leadership an army needs to be victorious. But I don’t want to do battle with anyone. What I really desire is, not debate, but dialog. We don’t need to be on opposite sides, do we?

      There are two concepts of power – unilateral or top-down power (power in the mode of domination and control), and relational power (the capacity to influence and be influenced). Unilateral power is generally associated with the masculine (“grow a pair [of testacles]”), and relational power is associated with the feminine. Quite often power is understood to be on a continuum from weak to strong, with pure relational power at the extreme ‘weak’ end of the line, and pure unilateral power at the extreme ‘strong’ end. This understanding has had and continues to have disastrous results. Unilateral power is synonymous, imo., with violence. Those who worship such power (a majority of our population, it seems) will use forms of violence in their relationships with others – including their conversation. I think this is the reason that in conversations, a person who speaks authoritatively (as though they KNOW) is more persuasively powerful than one who speaks tentatively or uncertainly. I think this is also the reason why, when there is a conversation which includes both genders, the voice of the females is often devalued or drowned out.

      “For most men, talk is primarily a means to preserve independence and negotiate and maintain status in a hierarchical social order. This is done by exhibiting knowledge and skill, and by holding center stage through verbal performance…” – Deborah Tannen, You Just Don’t Understand, 77

      As for ‘faith’, would you agree that there is more than one “definition”? I don’t think of faith as a belief held without proof. I think of faith as synonymous with ‘trust’. And usually when I exercise faith, it is because I have had some experience of trustworthiness in the object of my faith.

      1. Don is correct. My “grow a pair” comment was sexist. Bless him for pointing it out. Since I wrote it I can say with certainty that it was not meant to imply that women are weak.

        Regarding militaristic language: no apologies there. Don, perhaps you have negative feelings about your time in the Army. I do not have negative feelings about the years I spent in the Marines. That said, the language I use reflects my time in the Corps. Yet, I also believe it accurately reflects what happens when one acts from knowing. There is a huge difference between faith and knowing. Faith in the liberal world (I claim no allegiance to either viewpoint) sounds more PC than knowing. Even so, I have direct experience with both. Knowing is far superior to faith in many respects.

        I don’t write (or speak) from a knowing that is exclusive to me. Watch the upward spiral video I linked to in a recent post, apply the learning from it and you will come to know too. In this sense Erica is correct. Faith in times like these is not enough. We must move an entire world, an entire civilization that for now is not interested in moving. Interest is growing, but we have not yet reached momentum. To get there requires knowledge (knowing) on how to get there. Faith is shaky. Knowledge based on proof and experience will prevail.

        1. One other thing. I may be splitting hairs here, but this blog is not “Perry’s”. This blog belongs to Copiosis. Don, you may see no distinction in this. I do. That distinction will become clear as the Copiosis Team grows.

  2. Bertrand Russel said, “What men really want is not knowledge but certainty.” Better to have faith, imo., than to KNOW. And, imo,. the best faith to have, is a faith without certainty.

    >That thing larger than you is waiting for you to grow a pair. <

    Meaning what? Women are weak?

Leave a Reply