President Donald Trump

Press Secretary Sean Spicer


Embracing technology is often a source of isolation, but it can also be much more. It can be an avenue for us to interact despite differences in viewpoints and geography. It’s the role which is filled by Synthisophy, which means “The integration of socially pertinent information derived from the study of history into the present culture.” This website offers space and encouragement to move forward culturally and intellectually in vigorous and respectful discussions on current societal issues.

It may sound oxymoronic to suggest we are together as a collective of individuals, but it’s how the Internet has assembled us in cyberspace. Thanks to the wide-ranging inroads various communication platforms have made in sharing ideas, with or without rancor, it would be remiss of us as a society not to debate the social, political, scientific, and historical issues which have brought us through the digital and the information age.

Building Debate on a Strong Foundation

Throwing around baseless accusations, claims, or “facts” is not the route to meaningful debate. The foundation for weighty statements can be traced to the scientific method. This method takes a hypothesis, and then through an experiment or data research, either proves or disproves it.

When using this method to back up statements, it’s a path toward civil discussion. It is hard to refute fact-based claims which are supported by evidence. Wild, blanket statements with no connection to reality are quickly exposed, and eventually, it is hoped, that proponents of these statements will veer toward more reasoned debate. Here at Synthisophy we encourage the spread of intelligent commentary in the forums on many topics at facebook/synthisophy.

It’s not all Black and White

To foster an understanding of the real world, it’s important to learn about points of view which don’t match your own. The world is not a place where ideas and concepts can all easily be categorized into one vein or another, black or white. There are shades of grey to just about anything you can imagine, and that’s where our common understanding must lie. I see your view, and you see mine, and we either meet in the middle or agree to disagree in a mature, reasonable fashion.


Bringing the Two Together

 A two-party system underlies our democracy, and it’s what we know. It has also fostered polarization in our society, where you’re either right or left, with precious few moderates to be found. Reasoned, intelligent debate based on sound principles is the key to understanding and the way to enlightenment and truth.


Browse the latest discussions below and engage in intelligent debate. Contact us to learn more about synthisophy, or read the 370 page book by chapter above. Share what you think here at synthisophy!

Add Text Here...

Add Text Here...

Doublethink is a term and concept described in George Orwell’s book 1984, published in 1949. Doublethink is the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct social contexts.

Examples of such from his book 1984 would be War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Strength, the three slogans of the Ministry of Truth.  Does this term apply at all to the following statements from President Trump and responses to such from National Security Advisor John Bolton on Fox Sunday morning news 3.3.19 with Chris Wallace:

Background: Trump after his recent meeting with North Korea leader Kim Jung Un in Hanoi, regarding the torture and death of Otto Warmbier after he was imprisoned in North Korea for theft of a propaganda poster: “Kim tells me he didn’t know about it, and I will take him at his word.”

Wallace: Why did President Trump take Kim’s word that he didn’t know?

Bolton: “When he says I’m going to take Kim at his word, it doesn’t mean that he accepts it as reality, it means he accepts that’s what Kim said.”

Wallace: “So when he says he takes Kim at his word, it doesn’t mean that he believes Kim Jung Un?”

Bolton: ‘Well, that’s what he said.”

Wallace: Here’s what Trump said about the Saudi murder of Jamal Khashoggi: I hate crime, I hate what’s done, I hate the cover up.  And I will tell you this, the Crown Prince hates it more than I do, and they have vehemently denied it.

Wallace: Here’s what Trump said in Helsinki with Putin about whether Russia interfered in the 2016 Presidential election: I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today.  He just said it wasn’t Russia.  I will say this, I don’t see any reason why it would be.

Wallace: Why does Trump trust Putin, the Crown Prince and Kim over US intelligence?

Bolton: “I don’t think that’s what he was saying.”

Are Bolton’s statements examples of 1984 doublethink?  Share your views at facebook/synthisophy!

Add Text Here...

Add Text Here...

What’s your take on the political situation?

Mike Conaway, Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee, his statement to Adam Schiff, Democratic chairman of such, 3.28.19: “We have no faith in your abilities to discharge your duties in a manner consistent with your Constitutional responsibility and urge your immediate resignation as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.”

Schiff, his response to Conaway, after listing 16 issues within the Trump campaign regarding Russia: “You might say that’s all Okay, you might just say that’s just what you need to do to win. But I don’t think it’s Okay, I think it’s immoral, I think it’s unethical, I think it’s unpatriotic, and yes, I think it’s corrupt.”

Trump, at a rally in Michigan, 3.29.19: “After 3 years of lies, and smears and slander, the Russian hoax is finally dead. The collusion delusion is over. The Special Counsel completed its report and found no collusion and no obstruction. Total exoneration, complete vindication.”

Nancy Pelosi, Democratic speaker of the House, in response to Attorney General William Barr’s 4 page summary of the Mueller investigation, 3.28.19: “Mr. Attorney General, show us the report and we’ll come to our own conclusions. We don’t need you to interpret it for us. It was condescending, it was arrogant, and it wasn’t the right thing to do.”

What are your views on these issues? Share them at facebook/synthisophy!

Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA), who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee, put in a formal request to IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig on April 3 asking for the president’s tax returns from 2013 to 2018 by April 10. The request is based on U.S. Code, Title 26, § 6103, Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information:

Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the Secretary of the Treasury shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request.

What’s your view on this request? Share your views at facebook/synthisophy!

Add Text Here...

What is the significance of the arrest of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy in London earlier this week (4.11.19)? He initially sought asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden on assault charges against him that took place in 2010. Also in 2010 Assange was involved with Chelsea Manning (then Bradley Manning), an army intelligence analyst, who broke into a secret level Army server housing 400,000 US government national defense documents. Manning could not gain access to these files, but then contacted Assange, who was then able to hack and gain access to these 400,000 files, which he then disseminated on Wikileaks. Sweden is now considering requesting Assange’s extradition to their country on those earlier assault charges. And the US has also requested extradition based on charges of Assange’s hacking of that Army server and dissemination of that information. Not quite yet on the horizon but certainly expected to arise at some point is the accusation that Assange and Wikileaks was involved in the dissemination of the Russian hacked DNC files in the 2016 presidential election. What is the significance of Assange’s arrest and where do you think it will go?  Share your views at facebook/synthisophy!

What do you think of Barr’s release of the redacted Mueller Report? What do you think is going to happen?  What do you think should happen?

Trump, 3.29.19: “After 3 years of lies, and smears and slander, the Russian hoax is finally dead. The collusion delusion is over. The Special Counsel completed its report and found no collusion and no obstruction. Total exoneration, complete vindication.”

Muller states in his Report:  "While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime (obstruction of justice), it also does not exonerate him"

Barr states on 3.24.19 and restates in his press conference before release of the redacted report on 4.18.19: “I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.”

Pelosi and Schumer on 4.18.19:
"Attorney General Barr’s regrettably partisan handling of the Mueller report have resulted in a crisis of confidence in his independence and impartiality. We believe the only way to begin restoring public trust in the handling of the special counsel’s investigation is for special counsel Mueller himself to provide public testimony in the House and Senate as soon as possible. The American people deserve to hear the truth."

Elizabeth Warren, 4.19.19:
The severity of this misconduct demands that elected officials in both parties set aside political considerations and do their constitutional duty. That means the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States.

What’s your take on Barr’s release of the redacted Mueller report? Share your views at facebook/synthisophy!




Add Text Here...

Add Text Here...