You are on page 1of 31

THE CURRENT STATUS : The Individual

vs. The State

THE CREATIVITY PACKET (until destroyed, eliminated, by ONVOL, a Maltese ISP from the

internet secretly, thievingly and illegally with apparent government approval, had been available at www.tcp.com.mt) was a de facto non-profit enterprise launched by Dr. Paul
Henrickson, after he had moved to Malta, as an exercise in the practical application of six decades of study and research in areas such as education, experimental psychology, art history, art production and the occasional political commentary. This was a sharing of knowledge. There was no income derived from the exercise, but many commented on the probable fact that this mental occupation was good for someone who had retired. From Henricksons point of view, however, he ,too, was learning from this effort at which he spent 14 hours every day, seven days a week What was not known at the beginning was that despite all protests to the contrary the inadequately educated Maltese resent accomplishments by others in any field if it appears to challenge their self assessment. Judgments on the basis of the requirements of the discipline are ignored and disparagements of colleagues , even Maltese colleagues, are common and in some instances a threat of a law suit is likely, The most recent occurrence affected by Melitaplc, Onvol, of Malta epitomises several earlier outrages to civilized behaviour characterized by the lies and malfeasance of three socially respected and government supported Maltese judges, Mario Scerri, Noel Scerri and Judge Fenech of the Small Claims Court. this incident is reviewed in the section entitled Government Sponsored Extortion found below. The intellectual ground-base for much of Henricksons is rooted in his creativity research conducted nearly fifty years ago at The University of Northern Iowa, through which, by chance, he learned that the official educational claims were in direct opposition to their practices. In short either the University did not know what it was doing or, they did know and they intentionally lied about it.This report is also below and entitled The Perceptive and Silenced Minorities. It should be noted, at this point, that there is a growing belief among non-Maltese and confirmation among some Maltese that the socially functioning exploitation of those not believed to be of Maltese background in the daily over charging by an estimated 30% on electric and water use charges by Enemalta , a practice seemingly supported by government inaction has devolved to the one local merchant who defended herself for another 30% overcharge (for batteries that were dead) on the grounds that the client spoke English and, therefore, could afford to pay it. There have been numerous other examples publically reported in this proclaimed Christian community.

GOVERNMENT SPONSORED EXTORTION IN MALTA RAISES THE QUESTION, THE THEOLOGICAL QUESTION, AS TO WHAT THE TEACHING MAY HAVE BEEN Paul of Tarsus brought to the island.

PROSPECTUS MELITENSIS

by Paul Henrickson, Ph.D. 2010

It might be tempting, at times and for some, to create a metaphor out of Maltas geographical position vis a vis the rest of Europe and with the evidence provided by some of the actions of Maltese corporations, and political parties there might appear some justification. But I will not do that mainly because it would be contrary to both my expectations and my desires. I will, however, express my present grave concern for the evident greed and misdirected intellect and self-destructive hubris that portends a catastrophe. The following outlines my inane preoccupation with some contrived conviction imposed upon me by some social myth. It is evident that the entire world, with few if any, islands of purity is engulfed in a maelstrom of fabrications which spun, layer upon layer have served to bind into impotence the once potentially creative processes of a population of 400,000 presently lost souls. A vivid example of the point I wish to make was unwittingly presented in a YouTube video discussing, somewhat patronizingly, one episode in the Iraqi war where after a helicopter attack on a civilian group civilian rescuers had come to rescue the only wounded but living man by moving him into their van were seen, by the narrator of the video discussing the event as having, somehow, broken the rules of war and so they, too, were killed and two 7-8 year-old children in the van critically wounded. Since when, I had to ask myself, are the rules of war supreme over the rules of humanity? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zok8yMxXEwk The men in the helicopter are excused by the military analyst on the grounds that in a battle situation those involved are on high alert and energy and therefore may have mistaken a camera for a gun. I wonder the same explanation might have been applied to the situation in New Mexico (USA) where a police officer shot a man (fatally, I think) because the officer had mistaken a crucifix for a gun. My contention is that it takes a certain type of personality with a certain type of training to function as a police officer or military man at all. When I lived in a community in southwest Virginia (USA) I was observed, by a woman I did not know, who was walking down the entrance walk to her sisters house, planting young annuals for the summer garden in the front of my house, This woman was, apparently, offended and obliged to

remind me with a sarcastic tone Theyll do nicely if you plant them on Sunday. She was right, but the somewhat ridiculous thought I occurred to me I wonder if the seedlings know that. This woman, who probably believed, she was absolutely right in her authority as a respectable woman in the community to expect a stranger to adjust his behaviour to her expectations...at least on the

matter of planting seedlings on Sunday. I wish I had reminded her that her hemline was more than 12 inches above the floor and that her revealed ankles were a temptation to all mankind. In point of fact they, were not, especially not after the

photograph of Marilyn Monroe standing over a street exhaust.

and a kilt-wearer has the same problem This was the same community which was reported to have pressured the University President to have his wife note down the names for future rebuke of university girl students who failed to wear both hats and gloves at Sunday worship. To my mind these are all examples of the application of so-called authority over the lives...the privately owned lives...of others. These are examples of abuse of power as are the expectations of a lawyer hired by Maltacom to discredit the intelligence of a defendant in a court case by calling to the attention of the judge that the individual could not remember his own telephone number...which

Maltacom had disconnected 7 years earlier. The Judge and the lawyer, of course, being members of the same community, understood each other and agreed that this was a demerit, as opposed to my opinion that remembering a useless telephone number to a disconnected phone might have been more clearly evidence of dementia than this conspiracy between big business and law courts would have allowed. What all these examples illustrate is not the application of intelligence, but power. In my opinion unmoderated power is barbaric. Perhaps those school systems which state they wish to encourage critical thinking might be called upon to more clearly define the parameters they have in mind if they do not wish to come face to face with the ire of authority. After all, while critical thinking is thought to be a worthy goal possessing certain intellectual advantages power insists on exercising its own privileges and cannot tolerate disagreement or disobedience. All the above are intended to set the stage for, perhaps, an understanding that has not experienced much exposure in many parts of the world, and, in some, seems to be in retreat. That understanding is that while rulesany rules, anywhere at any timeare subject to change, sometimes convenient, sometimes inconvenient, sometimes moral, sometimes immoral. The example that follows which is a real one should show us the outlines of rules of conduct that have been changed, at least in their application, for the convenience of a brotherhood in power and for the immoral application to the disadvantage of an alien minority. Fortunately, it seems, this is becoming more widespreadly known in that one of the bastions of political and governmental power (Enemalta, the supplier of water and electrical power) have been already publicly accused of charging 30% more to non-Maltese speaking clients than to Maltese. One might only wonder whether this characteristic was present at the time of Pauls shipwreck and that he failed to notice it or was it one of his related teachings. The example follows: This example describes an extended controversy between someone living in Malta and the telecommunications organization Maltacom GO with the Maltese judicial system ostensibly acting as the moderator of justice. As it turned out, however, there was neither justice nor moderation but the unadulterated exercise of unreasonable power. Maltacom became so accustomed to the clients request, sent in response to bills to have the charges to his account reviewed by some alleged functioning contestation committee that they automatically sent him a rejection of his request without his having requested one. This clued the client into the probability that Maltacoms claims for fairness to clients was bogus. Maltacom p.l.c.
Spencer Hill Marsa HMR12, MALTA

P.O.Box 40

Hamrun, HMR01,MALTA

To Maltacom Contestation committee:

I am submitting the following for your consideration.

There are three sheets of telephone calls listed. Those that have been crossed out are NOT in contest. Those with notes made by them are in contest. There are several calls listed belonging to people I do not know. There are also several listed with no identification.

I was unable to verify calls to cell phones as the program of the net doesnt seem to allow for it. These calls should also be considered under contest. The total Lm is 4.48 from a telephone bill of Lm119.49.

At that time the client decided to stop asking Maltacom to do what it claimed it did and decided to get the court system to ask this important Maltese corporation to behave properly. This decision produced its own revelations. The client carefully prepared his case, acting as his own attorney, and secured a witness to his claims. The client and the witness arrived before the agreed time and after waiting in the presence of the judge, Judge Fenech, for some time it was finally concluded that

Defendant, Maltacom, was not going to appear.

At that point the Plaintiff asked Judge Fenech to rule in his favour. Judge Fenech refused. Noel Scerri who identifies himself B.A. L.P.an associate of Matacom, p.l.c. and states the following: The defendant knows of no Court (Tribunal) sitting scheduled in 2003 for which it did not attend. The cause for that defendants denial is a mystery. Perhaps it had something to do with the fact that usually it was Maltacom who was the plaintiff and not the defendant. Judge Fenech asked the plaintiff to submit the telephone numbers in question. The plaintiff did so. Not wanting to be accused of tampering with evidence he submitted the bill themselves as they had been sent to him and in sequential order. This Judge Fenech rejected when he saw about fifty pages in front of him. He then ordered the plaintiff to highlight the numbers in question. The plaintiff did so and Judge Fenech rejected that solution. He then ordered the plaintiff to separate them out from all the other numbered

listings and so the plaintiff did so, but then Judge Fenech said he would not even look at the numbers but would give his decision in writing within a week. He did so, but the decision came to the plaintiff in Maltese , which the plaintiff did not read, even while the court proceedings had, by mutual agreement , been conducted in English. The plaintiff-client had to finally secure a translation from a lawyer by the name of Charlie Galea who charged him 10 Maltese Lire (about $30) and failed to provide a written translation and, it turned out, had omitted telling the client the judgment included the statement that the plaintiff in the case had not presented evidence. This statement dictated, presumably, by Judge Fenech, was not true. The plaintiff/client had three times presented the evidence and each time embodied the changes ordered by the judge. It was the judge who refused to look at the evidence and not as was stated in the official judgment. Ergo, the judge lied. Now it was Maltacoms turn to bring charges against the client. This time in a different court with a different judge, one Mario Scerri. The client/defendant in this case pays the required fee to file an answer after he is told (without having asked) by the court that his house would be taken if he didnt answer. On some level of awareness it was this oddly appearing threatening statement that clued the defendant/client into the possibility that this had been the motivation all along. The client has been aware that those who conceive of criminal assault often inform their intended victims, in some fashion or another, of their intention. The defendant/client appeared in court before the time scheduled but waited the hour and a half seemingly required of subject-residents. He presented his objections to the proceedings, citing the fact that the issue had already been heard in another court and a decision, although unsatisfactory, made which had not been contested by the then defendant (Maltacom) and so this present case appeared illegal on the grounds of double jeopardy. Judge Sherri ignored this objection.

The defendant/client presented much of the same material to make the same points as he had done in the earlier court. As the proceedings developed , in English by agreement, it was learned in a short conversation between The judge and the legal representative to Maltacom that because Maltacom computer system automatically deleted data after a certain period of time the defendants request to see the plaintiffs evidence upon which the Maltacom case rested could not be realized. There was, in effect, no evidence whatever to support the charges. At which point it seemed to the defendant the Judge was obliged to dismiss. He did not. So, judge Sherri aware of the situation still accepts as evidence the Maltacom Lawyer , a Mr. Mizi, displaying a table of random numbers and asked the defendant whether he recognized them. The defendant replied Noafter all, it is theoretically impossible to recognize random numbersthat is why they are random. When shown the telephone numbers in question of which the defendant had copies and the companys computer did not which the client/defendant had been ordered by Judge Scerri to provide (what is this?the

defendant providing the evidence for the plaintiff ?). When shown
the list of the numbers in question, this representative of the telephone company stated he did not recognize them and went through, in full face of the court, the charade of searching among his papers. In short this was a masquerade performance. So, despite the defendant providing the real evidence needed by the plaintiff the plaintiff denies recognizing the numbers as telephone numbers, perhaps, because he realized they would not, after all support his claim. The defendant client is still perplexed as to why Maltacom brought suit in the first place if they realized they lacked the evidence. Was it, perhaps, that they were trusting to the reputation, as Judge Sherri was reported having stated to a colleague in the court, that never sue the big companiesthey always win. What does such a statement imply coming from one who works daily in the systemdoes it mean the system in actuality functions on a system, other than the one outlined in the statutes?

Advancing in time to the present. A courts Marshall arrived at the clients office door in the afternoon of the 22nd of October, 2010 to deliver a notice of a warrant to garnish my bank account. The warrant was dated the 19th and had, I learned, somehow, later been issued on the 15th. So it took a week to come to me when had it been hand carried the drive would have been no longer than 10 minutes. However, it is clear that the intervening week meant an extra 8% interest on an alleged debt to Maltacom. This fact illustrates one of my original points and that is that for authority to be effective the power of compulsion must be exercised whether or not the one with the power is right or the offending individual plants marigolds on Sunday or fails to wear gloves or a hat to church. In this instance a bit more bizarre for it is not customary to challenge the occult arrangements between government and big Maltese corporations. The notice of warrant mentioned a figure of E- 864.09, but when the client finally made out the check it had advanced to E- 1104.09. All in a matter of two days. There is, now, no doubt in my mind that the courts of Malta comprise a criminal organization and following the actions of the faith of Julian Assange the best way to eliminate it is to expose it. If, by chance there are those, in power yet, who may agree with me, I am, in my turn, revising my damages from the E- 445.31 which represents my expenses, but not my damages which normally would bring the total to E 13,378.93 I have decided that the offenses to humanity are so great that that small sum, if awarded, would not have impressed these people who have behaved with so much greed and hubris. Consequently, I think the sum of E1,337,893.00 might do the job and they, and others, might be less able to forget. Additionally, I would advise the disbarment of all lawyers concerned for a period of 15 years .

A SHORT HISTORY OFCORPORATE AND GOVERNMENTAL DECEIT IN MALTA

THE PERCEPTIVE AND SILENCED MINORITIES

by Paul Henrickson, Ph.D. 1970

There is an indication from recent studies {Lying, Dogmatic, and Creative Persons, Paul Robert Henrickson, Department of Art, University of Northern Iowa, May 18, 1970) conducted at The University of Northern Iowa that there may exist 4% of the untrained, uneducated and unsophisticated judging population which may be as perceptive as experts in a field. It is not unreasonable to expect a small percentage of any population to be more perceptive than the rest. In what other way might we account for the germination of so many kinds of interests, pursuits and mental activities? Someone, somewhere at

some time had to be more perceptive than others in some manner or other, or leaders in any field could not have been identifiednor, indeed, could the field itself exist for the existence of different fields presupposes divergent points of view. Consider the idea that 4% of the population might be the number appropriately destined to lead a society out of the sterile contentment toward the edge of awareness. Such a view supports the idea that there are decisions which can be better made by the very few, than by the many. An oligarchic think tank may be appropriate after all even within a largely democratic system. If it were not so, what role should democracy play in, for example, aesthetics, or in the establishment of truth? Should we then accept the idea that beauty and truth are a matter of majority opinion? If consensus could establish truth and point out the beautiful there would then be no reason for the loftier concerns of rarer persons. The 4% to which I have special reference earned a grade-point average somewhat below a 2.2 at The University of Northern Iowa. Because of this and an administrative decision not to allow students who earned a GPA less than 2.2. to register for practice teaching a requirement for graduation within the program for teacher preparation these students will not be expected to enter the teaching field. I imagine that other institutions have similar requirements. This particular 4% indicated that their perceptions in a field for which they had no special training were the equivalent to those of trained specialists. Thus it may be that there are throughout the country thousands of perceptive college students enrolled in institutions of teacher preparation who will never see a public school classroom and by not being there will be impoverishing the educational system and depriving the nation of enlightened leadership. It is not my intention to suggest that a grade-point average has no bearing on the individuals effectiveness as a teacher although, at this institution, it is the deciding one. However, it may be important to point out the possibility that it may be a difference in values- a difference in kind as well as a difference in degree of conformity to expectations- which determines the amount of energy an individual may be willing to use in meeting preset, system-determined goals. In the research identified above it was indicated that some of those who will not be allowed to teach our young are among the most perceptive in matters of aesthetic judgment. If it seems reasonable that we provide sensitive and perceptive persons the opportunity to fill positions where their special abilities could be most effectively utilized why is it that a significant percentage of such people are excluded? Not to use them where and when they can be helpful in providing the young with higher order insights in these times is wasteful, negligent and criminal. It might be helpful to describe the setting from which the awareness of this perceptive 4% was made. There are 120 art products actually, designs or pictures made in

response to a creativity task called The Creativity Design Test (CDT)judged by 69 inexperienced non-art majors and seven art faculty from this University. The top 10% in agreement with their peers and the lowest 10% in agreement with their peers on the matter of aesthetic judgments of these works as determined by a value scale of from 1-5 on a continuum of like-dislike were compared with the art faculty on this variable. Two of the seven in best agreement with their peers agreed statistically significantly with the art faculty at the .o5 level of significance. The five remaining did not. Three of the seven in lowest peer agreement agreed significantly with the art faculty at THE .OO5 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE. The remaining four did not agree significantly with the faculty. See Table I.

TABLE I Means, Standard Deviations of the Inexperienced and Experienced Judges Averages and Coefficients of correlation with the 7 judges in Highest and 7JNudges in lowest Agreement with the Inexperienced and Experienced Judges Experienced Judges: Mean=1,92, S.D.=0.52 High 1 High2 High3 High4 High5 High6 High7 0.05 0.16* 0.16* 0.14 0.05 0.09 0.01

Inexperienced Judges: Mean=2.71, S.D.=0.56 High 1 High2 High3 High4 High5 High6 High7

0.64***0.61***0.67***0.57***0.66***0.60***0.65***

Experienced Judges : Low1 Low2 Low3 Low4 low5 Low6 Low7

0.37***0.25***0.10

0.11.. 0.10..0.30*** 0.13

Inexperienced Judges: Low1 Low2 Low3 Low4 Low5 Low 6 Low7

0.33***0.21* 0.19

0.32***0.27***o.46***-0.14

***

sig.@.05 LEVEL sig..005 LEVEL

Although the statistics do not deal with this problem directly I suspect that there may be operating between the consistently lower academic ratings {In both High School and college the GPA of the high agree-ers was approximately one grade point higher than for the low agree-ers.) achieved by the high agree-ers, and the factor of agreement between the low agree-ers and the experts is a matter of a two-edged perception. On the one hand, the perceptive individual is capable of responding, intuitively perhaps, but still effectively, and with insight, on a level of excellence comparable to the specialist. On the other hand, he is, in most academic situations, required to respond on a level of excellence set by non-specialists (teachers) operating on assumptions they may not care to test, while ignoring the pertinence and sophistication of unscheduled data. Is there any wonder that the perceptive person would lose interest in what must surely appear to him to be inept and misguided procrustean exercises which, whether by design or not, effectively reduces intelligent behavior while it encourages mindless intellection and the conforming of thought processes? The situation presented to the low agree-ers might be described as some kind of dilemma. On the one hand the low agree-er achieves a level of excellence comparable to that of the experts, perhaps because his expressed responses are genuinely his own, rather than the offspring of consensus. On the other hand his GPA remained lower than that of his consensus-bound colleagues because he, perceiving more accurately, more clearly, and with greater interest than his peers, finds that there are consequently fewer persons with whom he might establish consensual validity, which, understandably, might restrict ones risking revealing them to peers who may even be unaware of their existence. Sensitive to the pressures of conformity he might not assert the superiority of his perceptions. By not asserting their pertanency he could retain some of the security offered by agreement with the majority. It

could be hypothesized that a significant percentage of persons who are perceptive in specialized ways are correspondingly unaware of what is required to protect themselves from the actions of the mindless majority. One might vainly wish that the majority was not so sensitive about differences, but, that is why they are the majority. The balance sought between openness of expression about sensual perception on the one hand and blind sensual exclusivity on the other and formal hierarchal expression on the other could well describe a situation in which anxiety about the validity of ones perceptions comes into conflict with the need for companionship and the reassurances obtained through agreement. If most of the people around cannot, or will not, see the world as a more perceptive person sees it, the more perceptive person is required to adjust to the less adequate perceptions of the majority or suffer the risk of social and psychological alienation. In such a world one becomes aware that functional reality is a matter of opinion, and that, in general, the most persuasive opinion is that one held by the majorityat the level where the greatest number of sense data are held in common by the greatest number of persons.

The low agree-ers may perceive more expertly than do their chronological peers or even their program-bound teachers, but in an environment dominated by the inexpert their voice will have little effect and even matters of art will be determined by consensus. In such a situation one might expect the perpetuation of practices on the part of teachers who have consistently been rewarded for behavior which encourages mediocre, unsure, and inept, but safe, conforming and expected responses. We might also consider the possibility that GPA can as readily be determined by the expertise of the student in assessing and adapting to the level of group awarenessmerely as a function of the normal attraction toward the mean awarenessalthough it may be interpreted to imply excellence within the discipline. The continuance of practices which reward agreement and, at best, ignore, or worse, punish insight might be the unexpected result of determining suitability to teach largely by means of a GPA. There are limitations in the present data. To many, the major insufficiency lies in the amount of statistical support which might otherwise allow statements of a really conclusive nature. At this time I

merely wish to take advantage of the temptation to probe the implications of the data presently available. Current plans at The University of Northern Iowa include a program of testing for 1970-1971 across several disciplines to assist in the determination of whether or not some kind of low-achieving but highly perceptive percentage of the student body exists.

In the course of formal analysis as well as in moments of informal preoccupation with the data. An auxiliary idea developed that suggested that both peer and authority pressures may operate to define the limits of group awareness and beliefs. In brief, the group exerts pressure on the individual to conform, not only behaviorally in terms of how he acts. But also sensually, in terms of how he admits sensual data into his personal analytical system. In short, there may be ways in which the reality to which the group will admit is defined by the group. Anyone more perceptive than the limits allowed by the group may find that truth is also a matter of opinion and that the punishment of being aware of more than what the group will authorize may range from mild forms of social isolation to the more aggressive declarations of insanity. For very enlightening discussion on the role of peer and family pressures and the importance of consensual validation the reader is referred to the works of R.D. Laing, especially Sanity, Madness and the Family. We are not involved here with the psychotic expressions of a personal otherness but only with the milder forms of difference in perception to which non-abnormally persons are subject. These persons may also be aware of the differences in which they perceive things from the way others perceive them. They may be able to live with this knowledge either by sublimating their responses to their environment and by agreeing, superficially at any rate, to see the world as others see it, or they may decide to let their more sensitive perceptions be examined in greater isolation. This last choice may have its dangers in the form of diminished human contact as well as its rewards in richer sensual experiences. In any event, some light on this matter may have been shed by the Guilford=Zimmerman Temperament Survey (GZTS) which was administered to the judges. Our original intention in administering this analytical tool was based on the hypothesis that possibly certain judges would select the works of certain artists because of some personality responsiveness to which there might have been some subliminal

evidence in the work of art. Very little of this sort of indicated. What we did learn, however, was that there are some indications although statistically non-significant that low agree-ers and high agree-ers have somewhat different patterns of lying. The term lying is used here as the authors of the survey used it in describing the scale devised to assess misrepresentation. The three lie scales are individually designated as :careless-deviancy (CD), Gross Falsification (GF) and Subtle Falsification (SF).

It was observed that the GF and SF were larger for the high agree-ers than for the low agree-ers. The GF means for the high agree-ers and the low agree-ers were 14.00 and 11.43 respectively. The difference was less for the means for the SF were found. For the high agree-ers it was 5.86 and for the low agree-ers it was 5.57. The means for the CD scale differed somewhat between the high agree-ers and the low agree-etrs with the low agree-ers achieving a somewhat higher mean (2.71) than the high agree-ers (1.86). As it was the low agree-ers who obtained a somewhat high mean on the CD scale than did the High agree-ers we concluded that this might simply reflect that those who seem unconcerned about agreeing with their peers take greater risks, or, to put it another way. Those persons concerned with image make sure that they are not careless in their responses. It is, therefore, of interest to observe that carelessness is not characteristic of those desiring to conform. A conformist might be expected to be alert to the correctness of his behavior. If one wished to conform to recognize and accept the values of the group he would be scrupulous about attending to what they were. Fewer errors would be made as a result of carelessness. On the other hand, one might also expect a person desiring to conform to make some effort to achieve the appearance of this conformity. It may be that the differences in both the GF and the SF reflect this.

Another statistical analysis revealed that for the high agree-ers the process of subtle falsification played a greater role in the total falsification score than it did for the low agree-ers suggesting that the high agree-ers were additionally careful that their deceit, in so far as peer agreement is concerned, would not be detected. For the low agree-ers it is the CD which does so which suggests that low agree-ers are more interested in communicating what they perceive than they are in what others may think.

The following table may be of help in understanding the structure of falsification between the high and the low agree-ers.

TABLE II

INTERCORRELATIONS FROM THE FALSIFICATION SCALES OF THE GZTS FOR THE SEVEN HIGH AND THE SEVEN LOW AGREE-ERS. CD GF SF TOTAL

High Agree-ers CD GF SF

-0.29 -0.69* -0.17 0.70* 0.9698*** 0.72*

Low Agree-ers CD GF SF

-0.58 -0.79** -0.69 0.08 O.97*** 0.28

SIGIFICANT AT THE .05 LEVEL

** SIGNIFICANT AT THE .O1 LEVEL *** SIGNIFICANT AT THE .005 LEVEL

From this one might be tempted to conclude, as I do, that for the high agreeers, that is, those whose aesthetic judgments were similar to those of others in the group that intentional falsification in the reporting of their responses, an intentional misleading of those around them as to how they truly responded is an expression of a desire to avoid the insecurity brought on by the individuality of expression, or an effort, to resign the responsibility for their perceptions out of terror of exclusion.

If this interpretation is correct, it suggests that the psychologically healthy persons are those whose modes of adjustments have not including denying the evidence of their senses in an effort to achieve that false security held out by consensus and still have been able to withstand the fears of uncertainty and the pressures of isolation.

It might appear that the low agree-ers care less about such matters as the uniformity of awareness. Being, perhaps, more sure of their singularity as opposed to an uniformity of perception, they may not even fully r4alise that bodies of beliefs about things exist.

See Tables III and IV for a comparison of patterns of inter-agreement among high agree-ers and among low agree-ers.

TABLE III COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION AMONG 7 HIGH AGREE-ERS FROM THE GROUP OF INEXPERIENCED JUDGES

1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

0.50*** 0.39*** O.35*** O.60*** 0.51*** O.30*** 0.35*** 0.28*** 0.41*** 0.31*** 0.33*** 0.35*** 0.41*** 0.43*** 0.33*** 0.22** 0.24** 0.35*** 0.58*** 0.29*** 0.35***

** Significant at.01 level *** Significant at .005 level

TABLE IV COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION AMONG 7 LOW-AGEE-ERS FROM THE GROUP OF INEXPERIENCED JUDGES

1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

2 0.13

3 0.26*** 0.O8

0.13 0.24** 0.23** 0.14 0.05 0.07. 0.17* -0.02 -0.12 0.32*** 0.02 O.14 -0.08 0.13 -0.04 0.13 -0.07

0.15

** Significant at .01 level *** Significant at .005 level

The Low Agree-ers consistently gave evidence of their greater involvement in the judging process by assigning many more adjectives to the works they judged. See TABLE IV

TABLE V MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF HE MELANCHOLIC, PHLEGMATIC, SHOLERIC AND SANGUINE SCORES FOR THE 7 HIGH AND THE 7 LOW AGREE-ERS

HIGH AGREE-ERS LOW AGREE-ERS Means Melancholic Phlegmatic Choleric Sanguine 27.37 23.71 30.14 26.86 S.D. 12.84 9.69 19.51 13.69 Means 39.14 31.00 38.57 29.29 S.D. 13.77 8.54 13.56 7.65

It may be that the Low Agree-ers have more to react to and are more willing to react because they are simply more aware and more sensitive over a broader area of sense data than are the High Agree-ers. The High Agree-ers may, in a very real way, need sensory assistance, something like some people need a hearing aid and others need glasses. It should also be noted that there is nearly total inter agreement among the High Agree-ers than there is among the Low Agree-ers. High Agree-ers evidently do feel secure in the assurance of consensual validation and Low Agree-ers seem indifferent to it. Low Agree-ers may be more tolerant of differences in opinion as the above coefficients of correlations indicate.

Insight into the ways aesthetic judgments are made by experienced and inexperienced judges was gained when coefficients of correlation were obtained between the aesthetic scores assigned by the judges and the selection of one or several adjectives from a list of 32 from the Eysenck Personality Adjective Check List which had been presented top the judges in random order. These adjectives were available for selection to describe the designs. The Judges were ignorant of the particular significance of thee adjectives. They were not told, for example, that the list of adjectives had anything to do with personality assessment. It is possible that they may have observed some patterning in the selection, however, I believe that possibility to be slight.

The personality characteristics under study were extroversion, introversion, stable, unstable, melancholic, choleric, sanguine, and phlegmatic attitudes. The inexperienced judges aesthetic average mean was 1.93 with a standard deviation of 0.52. Coefficients opf correlation for each of the personality variables were as indicated in the table below.

TABLE VI

INDICATING THE COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION BETWEEN THE AESETHETIC JUDGMENTS IOR BOTH EXPERIENCED AND INEXPERIENCED JUDGES IN RELATION TO ASSIGNED PERSONALITY CHARACTERICS Inexperienced Judges Experienced Judges Introvert Extrovert Stable Unstable Melancholic Choleric Sanguine Phlegmatic 0.08 0.20* 0.60*** -0.34*** -0.35*** -0.08 0.45*** 0.36*** -0.06 0.10 -0.05 0.12 -0.01 0.12 0.02 -0.07

Significant at the .05 level

*** Significant at the .005 level There are some indications that the Low-Agree-ing inexperienced judges were more similar to the Experienced Judges in the pattern of their adjective assignments than were the High Agree-ing Judges see TABLE VI. However, from the above Table it can be observed that the Experienced Judges seemed to avoid making adjective assignments to the designs which might indicate that the Experienced Judges were making formal, i.e., judgments made on the basis of organization of design elements as opposed, as in the group of inexperienced judges, to making judgments based on affective responses. This may simply reinforce the idea that s professional knows what to do to achieve the results he wants and the nave subject is merely seduced.

TABLE VII Coefficients of correlation for the 7 high agree-ers and the 7 low agree-ers on the four personality variables (melancholic, phlegmatic, choleric, sanguine) associated with the Eysenck personality circle. Melancholic Phlegmatic Choleric Sanguine High Agree-ers M P C 1.00 0.95*** 0.93*** 0.95***

0.95*** 0.95*** 0.90***

Low Agree-ers M

1.00

0.43

0.76** 0.77**

0.56 0.91*** 0.73*

* Significant at .05 level ** Significant at .01 level ***Significant at .005 level

Note: Although both high and low groups revealed a level of internal agreement the low group revealed a tendency to be more discriminating in their method of making judgments in terms of the adjectives supplied them.

Incidentally, the coefficient of correlation between the aesthetic average of the inexperienced judges and the experienced judges was 0.19 and was significant at the .05 level.

These coefficients of correlation indicate that the inexperienced judges made aesthetic judgments which correlated, for the most part, with high levels of significance with the way they assigned descriptive adjectives. This, by indirection, may be seen as a kind of personality assessment. It can be observed that what the inexperienced judges said they liked aesthetically they would likely describe as being sanguine or phlegmatic, or, in terms of Eysenks Personality Circle (see figure 1) stable What they disliked strongly were products they described as melancholic and/or unstable. We may be justified in concluding from this that the inexperienced judge does not distinguish between personality assessments and aesthetic judgments, or, that he is prejudiced in favor of those which he interprets as stable. It may also be seen that the aesthetic judgments of experienced judges remain unrelated to personality assessments as determined by these means.

The matter of aesthetic preferences remain an entirely nagging matter. If we take, for example, only the role of stability as it can be evidenced in graphic work and see its representation in symmetry it is something quite different from what one might call dynamic symmetry. This might be a visual assembly essentially asymmetrical which has its conflicts of balance resolved by the cooperative interaction of the sensitive observer with the work of art. In such an experience, as probably in all essentially aesthetic experiences the work of art, as an aesthetic experience, achieves its completion in the response of the observer. It is in this way, then, that both the creation of a work of art for the creator and its perception on the part of the observer provide a platform to achieve, at least symbolically, a psychological balance and so both the creation and the perception of works of art become a therapeutic process.

These findings raise certain other additional questions. One of the first of these concerns an oft-repeated but incompletely understood claim that artists express their feelings or their emotions or their personalities. While, in a very general way, the statement points to a truth its acceptance among the general population produces some revulsion among professionalsand shoddy work from among those artists who want to ride free something like the kid who makes up as an old person and uses a cane in order not to have to pay the trolley fare. And they get away with it because of the willingness of observers to believe. This real process degenerates the value of a culture.

As it happened the Eysenck Short Test for neuroticism and extroversion (Forms A & B) were administered to the untutored artists. The function of the Eysenck Test is not as complex as were the personality judgments made by the 69 inexperienced and 7 experienced judges but both tools seem to be concerned with similar matters. It would not, I think, be unreasonable to suppose that, indeed, an artist does communicate his feelings that a small but still significant degree of correlation might exist between what the artist intended and what the observer perceived. Our research did not strongly suggest that this was so. It remains very much a matter of belief.

Since conforming people must decide to conform, albeit, perhaps, with some reluctance, it is reasonable to expect that such a decision is rooted in some evidence. Perhaps, out of fear, they seek guideposts to behavior and given the opportunity to recognize uncertainty in others some may develop the talent to subject and to coerce others for their own purposes, or, given that they are compassionate and caring will offer what aid is possible.

If, as this data does suggest, that there are some, in fact, the majority of people who will sacrifice their ability to observe independently in order not to have to face life alone there are those other braver souls who manage to maintain their independence of perception and describe events the way they see them. This takes considerable courage and probably not a little sacrifice in terms of social security.

In summary, then, we not only have a segment of the population that is more creative than the majority but we have as well, a small group who have not been professionally trained who demonstrate the ability to make professional level judgments and that this more perceptive group consistently achieve a grade point average one grade point lower than the majority, that they are denied access to the teacher preparation program, that they tell fewer lies than the majority and that they are the ones, one might suppose, consistently over-looked for advancements within the field. This is a society, then, that is ruled by the non-creative lying conformist. My Gosh! What a prospect!

The above report has been adapted (in 2008) from that of 1970.
THIS DOCUMENT IS ADDRESSED TO ALL RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATORS OF MELITAPLC.aka ONVOL, THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN,AN AGENCY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF MALTA....and other interested parties

In December of 2010 I wrote a check to the benefit of Melitaplc/Onvol for the amount of 150 Euros for a two year hosting of my website www.tcp.com.mt basically an educational website.

A year later ,forgetting I had accepted the offer for a two year contract which was to service me until the end of 2012, I responded to the reminder that a payment was due with another check for the amount of 75 Euros a payment which, in an honestly run book-keeping office would have brought

this contractual arrangement to the end of 2013.

Believing that my website property was in safe hands and I had no cause for concern when parties interested in my website began informing me that they were unable to reach it but, instead, received a response that the site was under maintenance a term which in normal English language usage means that the property is being cared for....not eliminated. The whereabouts of this website is to me unknown and no communication whatever has ever been received by me

from Melitaplc on the subject of the fate of my website nor the uses put to by my payments totalling 225 Euros
In so far as I have been able to determine the elimination of my website Melitaplc occurred sometime before July of 2011 which, in effect means that my total payments have not been used for their intended, and accepted, purpose and it additionally means that my property, the website, is no longer under my control and those hired and contracted to protect and safeguard it have, instead, not informed me of their, actions, kept my property from my control and its availability to other interested parties all of which amounts to an impressive collection of crimes perpetrated by Melitaplc and, unbelievably, supported by the Maltese government in their refusal to hear

from me complaints against this company which refusal, itself, is a crime.

This probably will be my last attempt to offer all involved the opportunity to set right their offenses against me. If I fail to receive proper responses from the parties involved I shall make full use of other venues open to me.

I require a just solution and the payments of all damages and penalties which are yet to be determined You have until the first of June to respond.

Paul Henrickson

You might also like