1

Hedonistic Calculous – Mental Mayhem Wrath

By Randy Gonzalez
 2

Hedonistic Calculous – Mental Mayhem Wrath

By Randy Gonzalez

In the realm of Gonzo Theory, an extremely complex multidimensional framework of thought,

the historic ideation of hedonistic calculous lurks in the shadows of criminological theory. Today,
such a notion is exceptionally relevant, especially in the ego-filled halls of academic. For that
matter, the self-centered bastions of government, commerce and industry and every nook and
cranny of human habitation. As to that suggestion, discussion is multifaceted. While there are
always exceptions to any generalization, the focus here in on human selfishness. From that self-
pleasing volition of willfulness, criminality unfolds in conspiracy and practice.
With regard to Gonzo Theory, where one major aspect is classical criminology, the immediate
assertion is that of free will. In the timid yet tumultuous torture of psychic revulsion, the emotional
reaction is a cavernous gasp of “oh my god”, the curse of free will unleashes the horrors of
Pandora’s Box. Screams from many dominions in academia, primarily the schools of “social
studies”, echo the vehemence against self-determination. Instead, to favor deterministic
domination by “demonic forces”, modern day supernaturalism wears the many disguises of
“mental illness”. For that, the pseudosciences pretend to be “scientific”.
In the vast influential reaches of the “social studies” philosophies, including criminology,
psychology, sociology and theology, nearly every aspect of American society has been “infected”.
At this point in time, it is too late to turn from the arrogance of mental mayhem and transcend to
higher planes of reason and rationality. Mainstream society reached the tipping point of persistent
and intentional “dumbing down” barely twenty years into the 21st century. Real scientist, as in
several prominent astrophysicists, suggested the human species has less than 100 years to work
out all the problems humanity creates. Willful choices are freely made and very real. 1
In consideration of such speculation, several scientists predicted human extinction by the end
of the century. Some of them alleged the barbarity, aggression and selfishness of humans to live
and work together foments the devolution of a dying species. With that, the realization that the
“pursuit of pleasure”, hedonism, for maladaptive and disruptive intentions, colludes to hasten
social regression. To that issue, a glance at national politics offers ample evidence of the
perpetration of stupid and contentious “polybabble” for the sake of public pandering.

1
Online news publication publishing science and political commentary; exact citations avoided to protect sources;
 3

As to the previously mentioned cosmological efforts to study human behavior, spheres of the
pseudosciences invite a range of speculation. A good story telling can really mess up a normally
quiet day when the subterfuge disagrees with the status quo. The “four horsemen of the intellectual
apocalypse”, criminology, psychology, sociology and theology, present conjecture offering both
good and not so good possibilities for further analysis. In the not so good range, contrived stupidity
often confounds the social spectrum with outright foolishness.
On the other hand, in the probability of the good range, reasonable commentary offers creative
speculations as to cause and effect. Within the schemes of the not so good strata, the psychobabble
is baffling. Nonetheless, all is vanity and all is allegory for the amative satiation of cracking the
ultimate code that explains the human species. By fable, metaphor or even analogy of sorts, the
anecdotal nature of contrived consensus is brutally reactionary.
Yet, finding the key to the dungeon of thinking, going through the keyhole into wonderland,
the quest reaches an unachievable stalemate. The mission continues. Not for just primal
understanding, nor even an elevated enlightenment, but the deep darkness of the black hole in
revealing the universal eternity of human consciousness. However, given the devolving state of
the human species, across every aspect of society, the regressive tendencies forsake the essential
efficacy of intense intellectual ascension. Finding the answers may be futile.
One author for example, writing about cultural masculinity laments the “pussification of
America”. As the argument goes, modern America faces a critical dilemma in which men act more
like women, with a loss of profound psychosexual identity. Accordingly, if the thesis is reasonable,
on or about 1960 and forward, a downward educational trend began which emphasized and
promoted male weakness. In an era where the proverbial playing field defaults to the lowest
common level, by which there are no winners or losers, self-centeredness flourishes.2
In the “pussification” of the American culture, self-gratification replaces self-reliance.
Individuation in personal evolution became abhorrent for many, in the fearful collectivist thinking
of status quo divisiveness. A condescending sense of entitlement switches places with rugged
individualism and learning how to deal with the harsh realities of life. Further, the aforementioned
article points to a study related to parental overindulgence and protectiveness to promote
unrealistic expectations in their children. As a result, younger generations accept the simplicity of
their over-valued sense of pretentious validation. Narcissistic regression festers widely.

2
Online blog promoting articles and information regarding cultural issues related to masculinity;
 4

As though a fairy tale of imaginative frivolity, festering deep in the folds of organic neural
activity, the illusion of “mind” foments every torture one can find. Self-interest is extraordinarily
an individual proclivity, forsaking the interests of others for the individuation of egoistic satiation.
Yet, there is the cry of the holy adherent proclaiming their reinvention of social justice. In reality
though, there is nothing new under all the planets and stars of the universe. To that, lurking just
below the surface, the human element knows its own deception. Many will gnash their teeth, rent
their attire, anoint with the ash of burnt offerings and wail to the contrary.
For the hard-core, “X-rated”, and cynical criminologist, the superficiality of unscientific
conjecture of modern times is quite entertaining. In addition, along with this suspiciousness of
typically the classical criminologist, the viewpoint scoffs at the hypocrisy of contemporary
sociological speculation. Of this, there seems to be a paradox within the vast “flat earth” realm of
the “social studies” arena. Picture for the moment a huge colosseum just for the playful fun.
Consider something like a Roman gladiator showground. Upper class elitists love this kind of stuff.
They always have and they always will enjoy being spectators for the kill.
Nonetheless, image the competition among the various schools of thought. Entering the arena
of portentous expectations, each fights to insist their perspective is the correct one. So,
academically speaking, or politically seeking, even socially tweaking, the diversity of
philosophical pontification claims the immediacy of definitive explanation. In reality, up against
real science, there are no absolute final and complete singularities. Obviously, in this contest not
many are skilled in the arts of war, or the tactics of physical combat. No, instead, the various
factions, kind of like cults, close ranks around their particular “language”.
That is their weaponry, jargon is the sword, and anecdote is the shield, while the regurgitation
of unscientific babble is the spear. Imagine if one had to defend their pretend “science” against the
real point of a razor-sharp blade. And so, absent serious challenge and serious questioning, the
theoretical hyperbole, across mainstream infotainment, gets away with fraud, fiction and often
clever con artistry. So well accepted in a devolving culture, where the average level of literacy is
in the realm of middle school, “psychic magicians” can get away with anything.
As the “stadium” of intellectual regression continues, the faux combatants contrive their various
psychosocial schemes to perpetuate what might be viewed as a paradox. While some fortune tellers
read their crystals balls, there emerges a paradox. Many of the psychics will admonish the confused
proselytes to “stop blaming others, or other things” for the necessity to grow up.
 5

That is a curious point to ponder. If, as one article from a famous magazine on “social studies”
suggests, a “consumer” should stop blaming externalities his or her poor choices. Responsibility
for personal accountability remains a hallmark of at least one school of thought in the vast reaches
of the “social studies” arena. In particular, this is in reference to the previous notions of the
classical school of criminology. As to that consideration, and by extension or application in a
broader spectrum, correlation from externalities of blame is irrelevant to the actual causation of
self-determination. Subsequent harm, degradation, invective, torture and so forth, are intentional,
premeditated with malice aforethought, for the purposes of personal gain.
In article from 2012, by a mainstream “social studies” researcher, the admonishment to society
suggested fessing up to the pursuit of personal pleasure at the expense of others. As people so often
do, blaming something or someone else for the purposeful dysfunctions that occur. Self-
indulgence, assumption of “victimization” as a perpetrator, or scapegoating others, is part of
playing the dangerous game of blaming. Irresponsibility is easily justified as a pattern of rational
self-indulgent behavior that serves the interest of the perpetrator.3
In a devolving cultural context, a collapsing society, accountability becomes more difficult to
achieve. Social media, mainstream infotainment, news media and political processes do not often
encourage mature growth and development. Likewise, a profound sense of maturity in the effort
needed to become a well-differentiated more enlightened individual is challenging. It is not only a
significant affront to the psychic senses to become an ascended personality; such effort defies the
imagination at every option. Seemingly, a person is at war within.
Perpetrators of illicit and counterproductive activities seek to avoid answerability. When
cornered, they claim all manner of unsubstantiated excusatory conjecture. To minimize culpability,
the “anarchistic” thought processes easily conclude that matters of liability are not applicable to
him or her in question. The shifting focus becomes convincingly one of a gambit of self-seeking
mitigation. Meanwhile, as observers often observe the bias of their observations, pundits usually
accept the sleight of hand tactics for “plausible deniability”. Some externality is responsible and
not the guilty party who perpetrated the incident in question. People, places and things, in general,
are used as the “real causative” factors for the misconduct. In the process of over-generalization
and lazy rationalization, a cover story cleverly masquerades for the reality of intentional
perpetration. Fictional thinking for self-serving seduction replaced factual reality.

3
Online journal article from a traditional human behavior school of thought pursuing psychological assessment;
 6

Confusing and counterproductive are the myriad philosophical speculations asserting the
specificity of hasty generalizations. Unraveling the mysterious intricacy of human thinking, and
subsequent motivations, is akin to making sense out of weather related “spaghetti” models. Yet,
that is overly simplistic in the notion that meteorology is probably more predictable than human
behavior. Although in response, many behavioral analysists might disagree. In the self-assured
arenas of “academic jousting”, and other forms of theoretical “pugilism”, some schools of thought
are very defensive. More than a few academicians, particularly those who write textbooks,
frequently conclude a sufficiency of anecdotal citations in spite of scientific validation.
With regard to human behavior, and particularly criminality in the study of criminology, theory
often collides with the real world of the “criminal justice” practitioner. Outside the safe confines
of academia where many theorists conduct their studies, the harsh reality of human conflict
presents a deadly contrast. Likewise, the mention of something called “criminal justice” is
frequently contentious, confusing and confounding. For instance, politicians sometimes
understate, misunderstand and mislead the public and the press on issues related to things like
“criminal justice reform”. Similarly, the implications of mentioning something called the “criminal
justice system” does not clarify the reality as to how the U.S. systems function.
Since the focus here concerns that which relates to the United States, there is a lot of
misperception regarding crime, criminals and criminality in American Society. As to that, in the
U.S. there are criminal justice multi-system operating at the federal, state and local levels of
government. This presents an additional complexity to analyzing the full scope of criminality and
criminology in general. For the police, prosecutors, defenders, probation and corrections officers,
and associated first responders, they operate in this real world of human interactivity. For a
politician or celebrity pundit pretending to report news stories, there is an assumptive tendency to
suggest one size fits all. That is, one system one nation and one easy fix for everything.
However, the realty of the multidimensional intricacy defies quick cure-all simplicity. Counting
the federal level, adding states and counties and special jurisdictions, the American “criminal
justice system” is vast and diverse. One size does not fit all. With jails, holding facilities, prisons,
courthouses, police agencies, etc., unique features culminate at the local levels. There are many
organizational features, both public and private, interacting on a daily basis. Therefore, to suggest
the notion of a politician’s posture to fix the “criminal justice system” is to proclaim a shallow
self-serving and hedonistic need for personal validation. Which system gets fixed?
 7

Aside from the digression, the concept of hedonistic calculus likewise reflects the essential
necessity of individual “gain minus risk” assessment. For the “felicity calculus”, previously
proposed by Jeremy Bentham in the early 1800’s, espoused an algorithmic notion for calculating
pain versus pleasure. As some might assert, sometimes people reverse their view of that which is
pleasurable contrasted with painfulness. Of course, the actual measurement of human thinking
processes by an observer is highly speculative, theoretically abstract and provisionally subjective.
Yet, the philosophical interests are intriguing to the field of criminology.4
Nonetheless, assessing costs and benefits of actions relate to the willfulness to engage in, as
well as freely commit, an illicit or illegal breach of public civility. Historical investigators within
the framework of classical criminology, asserted the standpoint for the potentiality of purposeful
and premeditated behaviors. Maximizing pleasurable experiences and avoiding or minimizing the
painful ones, reside within the thinker of the pre-calculated eventualities. As anything of value,
that which is considered by the individual, to be relevant and subsequently of necessary gain. For
this, the rationality of choice is a matter of serious individuation.
While a certain person values a particular perspective, another may have a more diverse
viewpoint. Regardless, behaviors are very rational to the proclivities of the instigator involved.
Others may find associated behaviors morally repugnant, disturbing, and unethical and so on. Yet,
from a counterpoint, the behavior is extraordinarily rational. The notion of “antisocial” behaviors
stemming from some mysterious externality of alleged “cause and effect” is not only laughable,
but also absurd. Social issues arise as “hope springs eternal” that one school of thought, or another,
pretends human behavior is easily quantifiable into simplistic explanations.
Far too long, the “social studies” arena of academia wields too much power of influence over
political policymaking. In this pseudoscience realm, certain schools of thought in criminology,
psychology, sociology and theology, perpetrate myriad mitigations to excuse illicit behaviors of
every category. From the perspective of “demonic possession”, or causative factors doing evil and
residing outside the person, perpetration is peculiarly otherworldly. As such, in post-modern
America for instance, everyone is a victim and responsibility conveniently rationalized. Regardless
though, erroneous conjecture, more prevalent socially than ever, falsifies the underlying
motivational factors contingent upon willfully choosing to inflict harm on others. From the “social
studies industrial complex”, after the fact, most explanations are not even close.

4
World wide web information site dealing with criminological issues;
 8

In the malaise of discontent for a “single bullet” theory to explain everything about human
nature, the frustration surfaces in superficial conjectures. For some, preferring unlabored persistent
ignorance instead of strenuous critical analysis, mythologies will find refuge in false cause
pretentiousness to the reality of scientific authenticity. Ideologies of every kind, absent evidentiary
substantiation through skeptical scrutiny, with hidden motives, derail serious investigative
discourse. In the social mainstream, the confusion runs deeper than ever. Serious investigative
analysis devolves to quick fixes and easy answer, which foster dangerous consequences.
Of such concerns, examples reveal themselves in the divisiveness of modern politics and the
subsequent shallowness of public policy debates. Corresponding examples reflect the narrow and
divided perspectives in electoral processes, religious interactions and social media, becoming
increasingly prone toward debasing selfishness. Regardless, the fundamental notion of
motivational persistence is that of freely choosing certain courses of action. From the classical
criminological viewpoint, people engage willfully in the con of their self-gratification.
The proliferation of “selfie” oriented personal promotion demonstrates the regressive self-
centeredness of each successive generation. From so-called sit-coms to reality shows, or late-night
variety shows to cable network talk hosts, there is an abundance of condescending invective. To
look better than another, poke fun at institutions, and point out another’s shortcomings degrades
the social mainstream. In the meantime, such derisive antics promulgate bullying negativity that
makes one feel good at the expense of others. These are intentional unethical behaviors.
Hedonistic intentions often promote illicit activities, or become the basis for committing crimes
that gratifies the perpetrator. Whether the con job is an outlandish television commercial, or the
stupid commentary of a politician, it is a matter of probable gain in taking advantage of someone
else. The bullied person will likely suffer. For the instigator, when challenged, the “criminal mind-
set” quickly embraces easy rationalization in fabricating convenient excuses.
Entire industries willingly promote mitigating “diagnoses, in quickly blaming someone else.
Nonetheless, the bottom-line is that people freely pick their courses of action for the self-
flagellation of themselves. Speaking in a metaphorical sense, the “self-stroking”, “spanking”, or
“psychic flogging”, services the satiation of personal validation. The debauchery of arrogant
intemperance hastens the regression of the human species toward its contrived eventual extinction.
People are adept at their own deceptions and greedily embrace manipulative gambits of alleged
“magical sciences”, as hope springs eternal for mystical salvation from themselves.
9